First, I’m going to copy a portion of a recent post I made in the Maryland Shell Casing thread, on what I feel the goals of good gun legislation should be. A good law should do one or more of the following:
[list=1]
[li]Prevent criminals from obtaining useable guns in the first place.[/li][li]Reduce the incidence of firearms used in crime.[/li][li]Aid the authorities in prosecution of criminals after a gun is used in the commission of a crime.[/li][li]Increase gun safety and reduce accidents of legitimate users.[/li][/list=1]
Now, let’s see if handgun registration has any positive effects on the items above. First, definitions for some terms I’ll use below.
[ul]
[li]Known Criminal – this is a convicted felon. A person known by the courts and police to be ineligible to own handguns under current laws.[/li][li]Unknown Criminal – this is a person who has never been convicted of a crime. Whether he’s committed a crime, which would disqualify him from handgun ownership is immaterial. The authorities must, under current law, allow this person to purchase handguns from any source. You may consider this person to be purchasing the handgun for use in criminal enterprise.[/li][li]Legitimate User – this is a person who has never committed a crime which would disqualify him from handgun ownership under current laws, and has no intent to use that handgun for nefarious purposes.[/li][/ul]
[list=1]
[li]Does registration prevent criminals from obtaining guns? I don’t believe so. Criminals will do everything they can to avoid registration of handguns. At any rate, we have the “Gun Violence Prevention Act of 1994,” also known as the “Brady Law” for preventing known criminals from purchasing handguns. The Clinton Administration claims this law to be an unqualified success at keeping handguns out of the hands of known criminals. While that’s debatable, I’ll stipulate it for our purposes here. It’s simply outside the scope of what I wish to argue. So, registration either does nothing, or is unnecessary, to keep criminals from obtaining guns.[/li][li]Will registration of handguns reduce the use of them in the commission of a crime? I don’t believe so, since a person intent upon using a handgun for criminal purposes is going to do everything he can to avoid registration of that gun. If you can tell me how registration would reduce the incidence of handgun crime, please explain.[/li][li]Will registration of handguns aid authorities in tracing and prosecuting criminals after the commission of a gun crime? Remotely possible. To analyze the efficacy of this measure, we need first to determine how and where criminals obtain firearms. I shall now attempt to do so.[/li][ul]
[li]If known criminals are buying handguns through legitimate dealers, they and the dealer are already in violation of several current laws. Registration is going to have no effect since it’ll be avoided, just like these people are avoiding the Brady Law. Registration is useless in tracing this category of handguns.[/li][li]If known, or unknown criminals, are purchasing handguns from private citizens, registration may have some effect, if, and only if, that gun, when used in a subsequent crime by the registered purchaser, can be traced and linked “beyond reasonable doubt” to the registered purchaser. This requires a long unbroken trail and isn’t very likely, in my opinion. It also requires the registration of purchases from and to private citizens. This is supposed to take place through some still unexplained mechanism. It also still requires placing the perpetrator at the scene of the crime. The authorities will likely find the registration of handguns obtained by this method does little to help them trace and successfully prosecute the suspect.[/li][li]If known, or unknown criminals are obtaining guns by simply stealing them, obviously registration will do nothing to help trace and prosecute these people.[/li][li]If known, or unknown criminals are buying guns illegally on a black- or gray-market, registration again can do nothing to help trace and prosecute a criminal.[/li][li]If known, or unknown criminals are self-manufacturing handguns, I believe it is laughable to consider the likelihood of them registering that gun.[/li][/ul]
[li]Does registration promote gun safety and reduce accidents of legitimate (and even illegitimate) users? Not a chance.[/li][/list=1]
So, we’ve seen what registration cannot do, and that is, reduce gun crime or increase public safety. Now let’s take a look at what registration can do. When looking at this, please keep in mind, the burden of proof of the benefit to society from registering handguns, lies with the proponents of this legislation. Mere opposition to my objections, on any basis, is not good enough reason to pass a law. You must conclusively show the benefit to society outweighs the costs for this to be a good and valid law. Showing only that it does no harm to legitimate users or owners, is not an acceptable reason to pass a handgun registration law, or any law, for that matter.
Again, I’m sure you’ve heard all these costs to legitimate user before. Still, that makes them no less valid. Please counter them by showing that the benefit to society outweighs these costs.
[ul]
[li]Registration affects legitimate users only. Known, and unknown criminals will do everything possible to avoid registering a handgun, especially if their intent is to use it the commission of a crime later. This alone makes registration an unnecessary component in fighting crime.[/li][li]Registration allows the authorities to pinpoint legitimate owners only. In the case a tyrannical government somehow comes to power, this database would allow a despot to confiscate handguns from otherwise law-abiding owners. Please note this still does nothing about the unregistered handguns in the possession of criminals. It’s possible the criminal element would become unchecked by the threat of force from private citizens in the case of confiscation. Witness the organized crime that’s rampant in Russia.[/li][li]User fees. This could be used merely as another tax upon the populace. The potential for abuse through levying exorbitant registration fees could result in a de-facto handgun ban. Especially for those of limited and fixed incomes who have the same right of self-defense as any other individual. It is immoral to prevent an otherwise law-abiding citizen from using the very method of self-defense that he may be threatened with.[/li][li]New criminals. Since I’ve shown above that handgun registration has little or no effect on crime and criminals, it merely creates a new class of criminal. Those otherwise law-abiding citizens who would avoid, or attempt to avoid, registering their handguns.[/li][li]Abuse and mistakes. The potential for abuse or mistakes by the authorities when tracing owners of guns linked to crimes is very real. If a gun is stolen from a law-abiding owner, and subsequently used in the commission of a crime, it’s entirely possible that owner could be falsely accused of a crime. It’s also possible for that person to be falsely convicted and imprisoned for that crime. I have no faith in the authorities to maintain an up-to-date and error free database, especially when sales take place between private owners. The monetary costs of legal defense for this falsely accused citizen could be vast, not to mention the stigma attached to it. Many employers and application forms ask if a person has been accused of a felony.[/li][/ul]
There ya have it. Take it away, Don Pardo.
