Sorry. Another gun thread.
Background checks? Fine. No problem with that. I suspect that every person that buys a gun is on a list somewhere now. OK.
I don’t understand the ‘anti-gun’ folks desire to put everyone that owns a gun on a list. I own nine. All of them handed down to me.
My question is quite simple -
How would a database or list of all gun owners reduce crime?
It wouldn’t help reduce any crimes at all except for the one that the anti-gun rights crowd considers the ultimate crime: owning a gun!
Those people don’t give a rats behind about reducing crime, or safety, or anything even remotely related. They want a completely disarmed populace. They don’t want you to have any firearms what-so-ever. Not for self defense, not for the security of a free state, not for hunting, not even for target practice. NOTHING! And they are using incrementalism tactics to achieve this goal. Registration would be a powerful tool towards their goal.
The gun owner who buys into the ridiculous arguments that background checks, licensing, waiting periods, bans, etc. will somehow make us safer is a damn fool and not worthy of the freedom he is surrendering.
Imagine we woke up tomorrow and all privately held firearms had vanished into thin air, and after that all we were allowed to own were single shot Muskets from 1776. The minute someone committed a crime with one (and in a country of 300+ million it wouldn’t take real long) the anti-gunner would be screaming to ban those.
Unless it’s an admission that they want us completely disarmed, do not buy into anything these people say. It’s a lie!
Both of these points are false and misleading. In general, very few guns are “defective” in the way that term is usually applied to consumer products. Shooters are rarely injured from using the products as intended…guns rarely explode or otherwise cause injury through malfunction. Certainly not often enough to warrant regulation of the kind you seek.
Most gun related injuries are caused by either criminal or negligent action on the part of the shooter. The only “defect” is in the human being that wrongfully shot another human being. You can’t legislate or regulate that away.
Umm… Interesting posts.
But…
For what reason do my perfectly legal firearms need to be registered?
ed anger, if you use a long quote from an article or statement written by someone else, please add a link or quote boxes or both to make it clear you’re citing someone else’s work.
Firearms are hardly immune from regulation. In fact, very few consumer products are more heavily regulated.
I am not willing to surrender my firearms because criminals misuse them.
I see no reason why the firearms industry should be any more regulated than it is; they are already prohibited from selling defective products.
I already told you: so when they are perfectly illegal the authorities will know who to come to to get them. Bottom line that is the answer.
But I assume your waiting for the nonsense answer some anti will come in and tell you. How it will keep unauthorized people from having guns and other such lies.
All gun owners need to have an epiphany about antis underlying agenda. See post #2
Not talking about regulation, as far a manufacturing and such. Even very old firearms are quite safe.
What I would like to know, is why the ‘anti-gun’ crowd (sorry we need a better term for that) feels that registering guns make them safer?
In case some day they stop being legal, the cops will know exactly where they are. Should your name ever end up on a “no-gun-list” your registration would be denied, and you’d be required to hand in your guns. The guns would then be destroyed, while you wait to sort out the well-intentioned clerical error.
Eventually, someone named enipla, or enepla, or enebla, will be suspected of criminal involvement, so all of you will be on the no-gun-list.
It’s also a great way for a county to make money. What’s the point of having my vehicles registered? Does it somehow prevent crime, or is it just an easy way to collect $100 a year.
On a more serious note: if we assume that criminals won’t register, we can assume anyone not registered is a criminal. That makes a very powerful police tool.
That’s not quite fair; there are plenty of folks out there who just want a setup similar to the DMV and honestly don’t want any more regulation than that. The problem, of course, is that others DO want a total ban, and would use incrementalism techniques to get there. The DMV is only possible because ther is no powerful anti-car lobby, and so no reason for car and motorcycle owners to fear they’ll one day regret allowing the DMV to be created.
pkites - Please don’t poisen the well. I would just like some honest answers from those that are for gun registration, and how they think it will help reduce gun violence.
They think it will somehow keep criminals from owning weapons.
sorry, had the link in the other gun control thread i was posting in.
In general, that’s exactly what people on the right side of the aisle are trying to avoid. It represents more government involvement in their lives. It also requires a lot of government spending, so in turn registration will require a significant fee. Doesn’t take long for someone to realize they can increase that fee, and use it to pay for something else.
What do you think people feel about the DMV? Ever wonder why you have to give your SSN when you renew your driver’s licence? How are the two related? They are using that opportunity to screen for dead-beat dads that are delinquent on childsupport. How is that connected to use of a motor vehicle? As an immigrant my wife and I spent hours fighting with the DMV because they got used to crack down on illegal immigrants.
If you want to see how all this plays out I encourage you to read through Canadian Firearms Registry, spoiler alert it fails miserably costing the government millions. I won’t bother to cut and paste the entire thing here.
That’s a very good point. Vehicle registration really doesn’t do much to prevent crime; at best, it allows the police to reunite you with your stolen vehicle. Mostly it’s for tax purposes.
In some states, there’s also a requirement that a vehicle pass an emissions test and/ or a mechanical safety inspection, so in those places it also provides a minor public safety role. But that wouldn’t be relevant with guns, as they are so rarely mechanically defective.
That it does (Omaha has a handgun registration law for precisely that reason). And that’s another reason to be wary of a registration requirement: it could be easily misused.
exactly. firearms are dangerous and should be controlled. if they are more closely linked to their owners at each step this will prevent more from getting to criminals.
it does help prevent deaths, registered cars need inspections which help maintain them and ensure our safety. to drive a car you need a license when mean you understand the basics of driving and the laws on driving.
Why do gun grabbers always want to punish someone other than the shooter for gun-related crimes?
Most people seem to be pretty neutral about the DMV; they see licensing and registration as nothing more than a minor pain in the ass. But most people probably are unaware of the incidents of misuse you describe; if that became more widespread, I could see the general public souring on the whole idea pretty quickly.
And your examples are the reason I don’t favor firearms registration. There’s just too high a chance that the registration lists WILL be misused.
!. How?
2. Not everywhere, here in California, it’s smog only.