Your thoughts on Firearm Registration

I have several problems with gun registration. Some have previously cited Nazi Germany as an example. Besides, what would the penalty be for failure to register?

As for registration solving crimes, I don't buy it. Most criminals either confess or get ratted out by their girlfriend, friend, parents, or someone else. As much as one would like to chalk up crime solving to the police, most of the time there isn't much detective work involved. Most crooks smart enough not to come clean to someone within an hour and a half after the crime are smart enough not to buy a gun that will be registered or traced. They will also file off the serial number and dispose of the weapon. I'm sure a misdemeanor or minor felony for possessing an illegal weapon is a real concern to someone who robs banks and shoots people. I'm sure that extra year in prison on top of 25-50 probably scares them real bad.
 
Blackmind - I took the Waxman quote directly from the TFL link.
If someone is so fearful that, that they're going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, makes me very nervous that these people have these weapons at all!

Henry A. Waxman

Representative (D-CA)
Click to expand...
I think he was so scared he was stuttering at first, then leaving off words.

Here another example of what supposedly intelligent people think about those with guns. Sure makes me want to register everthing, so the thought police will have an easier time.
We must be able to arrest people before they commit crimes. By registering guns and knowing who has them we can do that... If they have guns they are pretty likely to commit a crime.

Mary Ann Carlson

State Senator (VT)
Click to expand...
Think there is no plan to eliminate guns?
Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.

Janet Reno

U.S. Attorney General

1993-12-10
Click to expand...
or
Gun violence won't be cured by one set of laws. It will require years of partial measures that will gradually tighten the requirements for gun ownership, and incrementally change expectations about the firepower that should be available to ordinary citizens.

New York Times

1993-12-21
Click to expand...
or
I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about, is that it will happen one very small step at a time, so that by the time people have "woken up" -- quote -- to what's happened, it's gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the beginning of the banning of semi-assault military weapons, that are military weapons, not "household" weapons, is the first step."

Barbara Fass

ABC News Special, Peter Jennings: Guns

Stockton, CA Mayor

1991-04-11
Click to expand...

Great stuff.
 
Most criminals either confess or get ratted out by their girlfriend, friend, parents, or someone else. As much as one would like to chalk up crime solving to the police, most of the time there isn't much detective work involved. Most crooks smart enough not to come clean to someone within an hour and a half after the crime are smart enough not to buy a gun that will be registered or traced. They will also file off the serial number and dispose of the weapon
Click to expand...
North Texan, curious, are you an investigator, LEO, etc?
 
Breach-
I call foul. You brought the subject up.
You're the investigator.
You stated:
Tyme, crimes are most certainly solved b/c of registration. As said before, sometimes it comes back to the same damn crook. More often than not, it comes back to someone that sold it, was in the same gang (yes, I have seen GBs with registered firearms, they just hadn't commited any crimes yet), or lent it, etc. There starts the lead that investigators need.
Click to expand...
The onus is on YOU to back up your claims with fact.

Source Please.
Rich
 
Breacher, as I said before, until the RKBA is out of danger, your claims are irrelevant to me even if you back them up with evidence. When such utterly asinine legislation as mandatory sales of trigger locks with handguns is supported by the Senate -- supposedly the wiser of the two branches of the legislature -- this country is in extremely bad shape and absolutely cannot be trusted with a firearms registration database, no matter how many criminals it might help catch.

I'll take you at your word that you've seen 4473s net suspects. That doesn't mean they wouldn't have been caught without the 4473s, but it might have been harder. People on the ground, human intelligence, things like that, rather than going through paperwork.
 
When it comes to registration of anything, you must remember...

People nowadays are accustomed to thinking of the government as The Keeper of all knowledge, understanding, documentation, and information.

It's very easy to go along with this sort of mindset, because it provides a feeling of comfort and security -- a belief that "everything's being taken care of and watched over."

So surely, this would include the government keeping track of things like who owns what plot of land (which it does); who owns what vehicle (which it does); who goes to what school (which it does); who has which children (which it does); who holds what professional licenses (which it does)... So people naturally expect that the government keeps track of who has what guns.

They never even think about WHY.

If we are to understand the push for registration, we must recognize that fact. They never even think about why. They just expect the government to be keeping track. Just... because.

-blackmind
 
Tyme, crimes are most certainly solved b/c of registration. As said before, sometimes it comes back to the same damn crook. More often than not, it comes back to someone that sold it, was in the same gang (yes, I have seen GBs with registered firearms, they just hadn't commited any crimes yet), or lent it, etc. There starts the lead that investigators need.
Again, I'm trying to understand reasons people have for not wanting to register. I'm trying to learn. Whether or not I agree, doesn't matter. I'm also throwing out reasons for registration. Also playing a little devil's advocate. Knowing all sides of an issue leads me to the path of a well informed decision.
Click to expand...

You're free to be a cheerleader for the folly that is gun registration if you feel like it, but the fact remains that many many gun murders are solved without the need or the use for a registration list.

You're don't really seem to me to be trying in good faith to understand reasons people have for not wanting to register -- we have made that clear hundreds of times over. It seems more like you just don't like those reasons, or you're bitter about the fact that they make perfect sense. You're re-approaching us over and over after we've made our reasons clear, and asking for them again. What do you think will have changed when you ask the thirtieth time?

You're trying to poke holes in the reasons you already understand. The fact remains: registration enables confiscation, and for that reason, it is to be avoided.

-blackmind
 
We must be able to arrest people before they commit crimes. By registering guns and knowing who has them we can do that... If they have guns they are pretty likely to commit a crime.

Mary Ann Carlson

State Senator (VT)
Click to expand...

:eek:
HOLY CRAP!

This woman is actually claiming that people who have guns are "pretty likely to commit a crime"?! Did her father/grandfather/brother/uncle never own a single gun?

Are 80,000,000+ people out there committing crimes?!

And does she mean gun crimes?...


I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about, is that it will happen one very small step at a time, so that by the time people have "woken up" -- quote -- to what's happened, it's gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the beginning of the banning of semi-assault military weapons, that are military weapons, not "household" weapons, is the first step."

Barbara Fass

ABC News Special, Peter Jennings: Guns

Stockton, CA Mayor
Click to expand...


First she comes off sounding like someone on our side, clearly articulating exactly what the NRA knows the anti-gunners are up to. Then she comes off sounding like she's saying a) the NRA has hit it on the nose, and b) the incremental banning IS what should be happening.

What the hell is a "semi-assault military weapon"? The idiot cannot even manage to make her mouth say "semi-automatic military-style weapon"?!

What a psycho-moron.

-blackmind
 
Rich, source=me. I'll give you a recent example b/c you seem so eager to question my integrity. My buddy found a pistol during an underwater evidence recovery search. They ran the serial number. Pistol was never reported stolen (so it would not have been in NCIC). After some investigation, they now have a lead tracking back to a murder suspect.
Blackmind, actually, no your quite wrong. I have read a few posts here that have actually made sense (anti-registration posts), which is what I was looking for. I'm poking holes in some of the more bogus explanations. The posts where the thought process was coherent and backed with some validity was exactly what I was asking for.
Tyme, I'm not trying to persuade you or anyone else, for that matter.
 
Was in Hawaii a few years ago, its a socialist state with total gun control/registration, permits to buy, permits to own and 10 days to register and pay the fee's for any gun brought into the state. Well at the time I was there no civilian had a gun in his possession. Seems the state Dems had ordered new gun classes for everybody and no possession of a gun until you paid for and passed the new course. As the Dems "forgot" to design or fund the new class ALL owners in Hawaii were required to surrender their guns to the police until the class was approved and funded. And yes they sent notices to all known addresses. At least two other states have required registration of "assault weapons" then in a year or two confiscated them and YES it was door to door. In fact one person just missed a SWAT raid on his house by moving out of state never to return. Germany, USSR, China and all the favorite Dem countries love registration. The reason is crystal clear why they demand it, to deny it is to show you are a fool :barf:
 
Your qoutes, your ball, your court.

Again, I'm trying to understand reasons people have for not wanting to register. I'm trying to learn. Whether or not I agree, doesn't matter. I'm also throwing out reasons for registration.
Click to expand...


No, you're not trying to understand. You're shooting down every veiw point given to you,seemingly without even considering it.
You're not trying to learn, you're trying to get someone to say what you want. You have a clear idea of the answer you want to hear, and are not going to give anyone serious consideration until you hear "the right answer".

Aside from the usual emotional outbursts and fear of JBTs coming and taking our weapons (notice my collective use of "our"), I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were on the subject.
Click to expand...

Every answer offered to you is valid. Every one has viable supporting evidence, not just emotion. One has only to watch the news to find it. And yes, we are afraid of SWAT teams kicking in doors and taking our guns, because IT WILL HAPPEN! It has happened too many times in too many places to deny that it can happen here.

You have been offered quotes, links, articles, and general knowledge historical references, all of which you have turned down as "jibberish".

Rich, source=me.
Click to expand...
That's pretty arrogant. Everyone here is wrong, but you are right?
You expect everyone to provide you with documentation, but we are to take your word as gospel? Why don't you stop eating ego-flakes for a bit?

So all our references and documentation are "emotional jibberish", but your statements are to be taken at their word? I doubt it. Why not try to walk your talk and LEARN from people, not argue with them, belittle them, or push your own machismo by forcing your point?

So what is the right answer, Breach? Why don't you tell us?
 
Last edited:
Your thoughts on Firearm Registration

"What is wrong with firearms registration?"
Click to expand...
Fortunately we don't have to think much to answer this question. Historical evidence in the US and Canada clearly demonstrates that there is simply no benefit whatsoever to registering firearms. It doesn't prevent people who shouldn't have firearms from getting them, and it doesn't help in tracking down criminals. It simply serves no viable purpose other than to harass firearm owners.
 
BreacherUp said:
Rich, source=me. I'll give you a recent example b/c you seem so eager to question my integrity.
Click to expand...
Anecdotal source. I'm sorry, that's valueless except in terms of anecdotal opinion.

As to "questioning your integrity", I beg your pardon? The question revealed that you have no independent source; you'd just like to create Public Policy based on your "feelings". No need, Breach....that's what our CongressCritters do, ad nauseum. I do not understand how people can make assertions and then get all personally injured when others ask the sources of their knowledge.

I was hardly questioning your integrity. I was questioning your **sources**. The fact that you're an LEO grants you as much "authority of opinion" in these matters as asking a sergeant in Baghdad how best to prosecute the war. Your opinion matters more than that of a non-LEO but only in a passing conversation. Not in a Public Policy challenge.

DOJ maintains real life stats for all manner of crime and punishment. Suggest you provide real info to back up your position. The rest of us can simply point to history and the Bill of Rights. There is no onus on us to refute individual opinion beyond that.
Rich
 
Okay, well from my limited knowledge of the subject and the evidence presented here, it seems clear that fears over registration are well founded. I have two more questions:
If "they" come for your guns, what will you (gun owners) do about it?
What can be done to help to ensure people who give gun owners a bad name are unable to buy guns? If this can be done by other means, then thats one less arguement for those to try to enforce registration.
 
"So what is the right answer, Breach? Why don't you tell us?"

No need. I'm sure we've all figured it out:

"Firearm registration is good. It helps the police solve crimes. The police are our friends. They would never, ever, ever, ever try to take our guns away. If just one child is saved, isn't it worth it?"

Tim
 
I'll put out one more thought. In 1990, I read my CO's Master's thesis. I cannot recall the title, but it was based on this quote.
"You cannot invade the mainlaind United States, there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass".....Admiral Yamamoto, Imperial Japan
The gist of the thesis was that an armed invasion of the United States would be next to futile, not only because of the law abiding gun owners who would turn on the invaders, but because of the gangs who already have a command and control structure that is unseen, but wants to preserve the staus quo. It was an interesting thesis. It went so far as to state that a database of names i.e. registration of guns, would simply be taken by the enemy invaders and used to disarm the resistance.

Again, saying that it cannot happen is speculation at best. The US has been invaded by enemy troops before. Armed resistance by the general populace repelled them as much as military resistance. Research the events of 1812.

What I would submit is preservation of the United States is far more important than making a cop's job easier if he finds a pistol at the bottom of a lake.
 
What did Canada's recently legislated firearm registration system cost? Has everyone complied with it? If not, are they now felons? How many crimes have been solved because of it? Is it cost effective?

When CA legislated AR's etc into registration, what percentage of owners actually did register them and what percentage became "Outlaws"?

"Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it" - George Santyana

...shall not be infringed... hmmmm. What does that REALLY mean?
 
Rich, the question YOU asked me was to provide a source that showed an example of a registered firearm helping solve a crime. I did provide a source and an example, NOT an opinion.
38, I AM trying to gather different, solid opnions re: this matter. I even brought many of these thoughts to a co-worker/friend of mine to discuss them. He is also libertarian. So when you're finished trying to put me down (which I do not mind being in a argument) b/c I'm actually trying to debate an issue with you, and not summarily kneel down to your superior knowledge of the world. As a matter of fact, my opinions had begin to drift. And no, some of the very first posts were very much the emotional, foil hat type arguments.
Well, TimR you win the a*shat award for mind reading, congrats.
For the rest, #1) I have never, nor will ever support the disarming of the citizens (as stated, oh about 3 pages ago). #2) Every time another knucklehead gun law is passed in this state, I'm the first to say "this state sucks".
I have heard and understood your one valid point. It is very valid and backed up with historical eveidence that has made me think on it. Only Tyme has actually tried to understand where I was coming from (isn't that what you have asked of me?) and debate w/o emotion (congrats tyme, you win nothing).
 
I have never, nor will ever support the disarming of the citizens... Every time another knucklehead gun law is passed in this state, I'm the first to say "this state sucks".
Click to expand...
Do you enforce or ignore those laws?
Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top