Ok, so we are now talking about a database of gun owners assembled from various sources, correct, as opposed to mandatory registration? Or are you setting aside the OP completely and proposing registration?
You don’t, you ask, and make it a crime to own one, and that’s all we do, as far as I know. How does the database help, exactly? Without registration, they can plausibly claim that the database is incorrect, or that they’ve already gotten rid of their guns.
I’m talking about a registration data base. It’s the only way to know if someone owns firearms when their right to own one is taken away.
Do you agree with that?
I suppose you need registration, then.
Will this database prevent guns getting into the hands of criminals? I’m only interested in a program that can show us something about guns getting to criminals. A list of people who like guns is thoroughly useless, I need to know what guns they own, when they bought them, who they bought them from, who they sold/gave it to, and when they sold/gave it away.
Guns are legally manufactured and legally sold and legally transferred, but gazillions of them wind up in the hands of felons and other idiots who are a public safety nuisance. You build a gun, your name is on that gun. You sell a gun, the new owner is on that gun. That gun winds up at a crime scene, the last person on the list had better fucking well explain how they lost control of a dangerous weapon. If this appears to happen routinely, they are clearly aiding and abetting these criminals by providing them with weapons.
Straw purchase? You damn well know that this gun is going to come back to haunt your ass when it’s finally obtained by the cops, so maybe you think twice about going down to VA to buy some guns to sell on the street in NYC.
I’m not certain what you mean by a “registration database”, but if it’s as I imagine, then no, I don’t support it. And I don’t think it would have the benefit you seem to think it will.
Yes, but that’s not what the OP was referring to, or at least not what I understood the OP to be referring to. A database of some people that are thought to own guns, culled from things like firearm license records, would not serve the purpose you’ve identified. I don’t see any purpose it would serve.
Right now they say something like “I lost it” or “it got stolen” and it seems to work well enough for most of them.
Have we completely diverged from the OP then? In the real world, what would you concede in order to achieve registration? Because on its own it’s not a feasible outcome.
Indeed, only registration would achieve those benefits. If the transfer of ownership doesn’t have to be reported, then any database will be highly inaccurate, which would preclude using it to identify unlawful owners.
Which is why some states have enacted laws making it a crime to not report a lost or stolen gun within a certain timeframe. Illinois is the latest, their governor signed the law a few days ago, and it’s already in effect. It gives a 72-hour window. Seven other states and D.C. have similar laws.
The OP was a gotcha ya attempt. I’m just responding to the common assertion that the only use to a database of gun owners is for UN black helicopter confiscation efforts.
It’s patently clear that if one agrees that criminals and mentally ill people should not have firearms, the only way to achieve this is to have a database telling you who owns firearms.
What could be a better way to convince the more paranoid people that their suspicious are well-founded?
Not necessarily. One could agree that those persons should be prohibited, but believe the costs associated with that particular solution are not worth the benefit. Case in point - you could have the absurd solution that we execute all criminals and mentally ill so they do not acquire firearms. It solves the prohibited person issue but the costs associated are too great.
A database of “criminals and mentally ill people” would seem to be more to your point.
Ummm … that might reduce the incidents of criminals with firearms, but it certainly hasn’t eliminated it anywhere it’s been tried. I believe Canada tried this and recently discarded their registration database because it was determined to have been largely useless.
The OP is pissed that a group that supposedly is looking out for the welfare of the common gun owner would secretly gather a database while publically fighting any attempts to do so by any government agency. Such a database is ripe for abuse no matter who controls it, and I have no faith at all that the NRA is capable of securing such information adequately enough so that the government couldn’t get a hold of it anyway.
So are you for, against, or indifferent to registration?
Although it is off-topic, I am against it.
:rolleyes:
I’m dubious of this claim. Do you have a post of yours that you can cite that is in support of gun rights from the past year or so that counters the many anti-gun posts that you make in all the gun threads?
Good to know. Are you opposed to the NRA collecting this data (the OP) at all, or are you opposed to their alleged hypocrisy? I do not think there is anything hypocritical about the NRA advocating against government registry while maintaining and gathering a private database. Do you think these are the same?
It’s also fairly obvious that they do this, just maybe not the scale. Direct advertising is common across industry so I would actually expect them to be doing this type of information gathering.
I’m a gun owner, and almost certainly am in the NRA’s database. I don’t mind, and hope they continue to use said database to effectively organize gun owners in opposition to all government gun control efforts, including registration schemes.