VPC's interesting perspective on gun registration

GnL

New member
Quoted from the http://www.vpc.org website:

{What are the limitations of licensing and registration?

Licensing systems are very expensive to administer. Canada's experience with its full licensing and registration system, begun in December 1998, is not encouraging. The government originally estimated that the cost of licensing Canada's three million gun owners and registering their seven million guns would be $185 million [Canadian] over five years including a one-time start-up cost of $85 million [Canadian]. But, by March 2000 the Canadian Firearms Centre admitted that the system had already cost Canadian taxpayers $327 million [Canadian] and was running up an annual bill nearly 10 times higher than the government's original forecast. The March announcement also revealed that although 270,000 valid licenses existed from the country's earlier gun control system, only 142,000 new licenses had been issued. Using these figures as a baseline for America's arsenal of 65 million handguns, the estimated cost of such a system here is staggering.

Most importantly, licensing and registration in America would have little effect on the vast majority of gun violence, such as unintentional gunshot deaths, suicides and the majority of homicides, since most homicides are the result of arguments between people who know each other and who purchase guns legally.}

So, according to VPC, registration is expensive, nearly impossible to administer, and virtually ineffective to reduce crime, but they want to do it anyway because it "supplements" regulation. WTF?



[This message has been edited by GnL (edited June 28, 2000).]
 
They still want it.

A: These guys are nuts calling for a ban on handguns before having them registered. The logistics of a handgun ban are impossible without registration, or at least registration/grandfathering as Washington DC has done.


B: They can't ban guns yet; but registration will cut back on sales due to extra red tape, including that which purchasers must go through. It will discourage new gun ownership for people buying their first gun - making a purchase less casual, e.g. not just walking into a store and walking out with something.
 
" since most homicides are the result of arguments between people who know each other and who purchase guns legally."

Most homicides are the result of criminals shooting each other; whether they know each other is irrelevant. And those folks don't buy their guns legally, unless you define straw sales as "legal."

Dick
 
I think you guys have it correctly.

They (VPC) are not particularly intelligent people. As such, the knee-jerk reaction has always been, BAN-BAN-BAN.

The difference is recently they have figured (or more likely, somebody pointed it out to them) out, that banning guns is useless unless you can confiscate the ones that are out there already.

So they've amended their platform.

Admit nothing, and make counter accusations...

------------------

~USP

"[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998
 
Back
Top