Registration

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

irishpunk

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
45
Location
Washington State
I have a question for you all...at the same time though, I think that I already know your answers. So I ask of you to please bare with me, because I'm about to, 'split a hair'.

Does any one of you support firearms registration? (of any kind). Having said that, I'm having trouble trying to expand on this question, so I will leave it at that. In addition, I do not mean to offend, but I'm fairly confident that most answers to this question will surprise.

I hereby look forward to your many answers, and after that, I will let the 'Cat out of the Bag'.

Thank you all in advance, and God Bless.
 
Nope. Registration leads to one of two things: Taxation or confiscation.

For example, we register our cars because we pay taxes that pay for our roads. Firearms are taxed at point of sale, so what is the actual point of registration?
 
Of course not. There is a 2A organization based out of WA state that took the position that registration was a 'reasonable compromise' after SH. This is stupidity. The agenda of the antis is to disarm the American citizenry . . period. Registration is for their objectives.

I used to support that WA state organization. I no longer do so.

Doesn't matter if they flipped to another position. At minimum, I no longer trust their capacity for reasoning.
 
Registration only tells those who want it where the good guy's guns are. Criminals don't/won't register their guns. So, what's the point except to tell the .gov where to go to confiscate them?
 
I don't send in warranty cards if that's what you mean.

As far as government registration, when it comes to firearms the only regulation I favor 100% is the regulation of double barrel guns (so both barrels hit where they should). I certainly don't favor regulations requiring firearm registration.
 
No form of registration has any merit.

The crime rate has fallen decade after decade without it so there's no indication of a need.

If there's no need then the expense is a burden on the public because there's no derived benefit to the public. "the public" meaning the whole of the population and not an individual.

We're so conditioned to think that we should submit some record of what we own or purchase to some organization that we don't think about the cost of such things or what is behind the requirement to register our TV or car. The basis for registration isn't to provide some beneficial service, but to deny one to you. You register your new TV, mail in your warranty card, so you can be denied the warranty if you're not registered as the original owner. You register your car so you can be taxed for it or be required to submit it for inspection. You would register a firearm for what reason if the government isn't going to provide a beneficial service to you or the public? Since they can't do either in this case what good comes of it?

Before registering a deed is brought up, the benefit there is to deny the counter claim on valuable property someone might make to take it from you (but the deed itself is the proof and registering it is to tax your property).
 
Last edited:
What are the benefits to me of registering my firearm? I don't see any.
Click to expand...

Just to play Devil's Advocate, registration could be used to establish ownership, in the same way that car titles are registered and deeds to real estate are recorded. On the other hand, nobody's advocating confiscation of cars or houses on the ground that they're "too dangerous" for ordinary people to own.

The most benign downside of registration would be that it would facilitate taxation of guns. The worst downside, outright confiscation. In fact, confiscation can't take place unless there's registration as a precondition.

In today's polarized climate, registration and owner licensing are both "red flags" that would draw vociferous opposition. There's no practical chance of either happening. In fact, even the antigunners have gone on to other things.
 
Regulating objects, including pretending to know who has them or where they are, has historically been demonstrated to be a fools errand.
 
No. Not even the manufacturer needs to know who owns its guns.

Perhaps a list of stolen guns could prove useful, but only to the extent it helps get gun and owner back together. Then, of course, it should be deleted from the list.
 
No. No nation, in the history of the world, has enacted weapons registration and not had it lead to further restriction at the very least. Eventually it has led to confiscation. It's as consistent as gravity.
 
I heard a representative from JPFO on Gun Talk Last week - had to dig up a link to the interesting discussion / history lesson and found it here.

Let me read a little bit and get back to ya on that question! :D
 
So I ask of you to please bare with me, because I'm about to, 'split a hair'.
Click to expand...

Not to split a hair but are you asking me to get naked with you? The answer is no. As to gun registration the answer remains no. :)

Ron
 
No.

And let me expand on this.

I see that we are pretty much on the same page for non registration of guns.
Any outcry when you have to register to vote?

I can guarantee more votes are stolen than guns.
 
The only reason to register guns is to establish a list for confiscation. Therefore I am 100% opposed to any scheme of registration. Like others here I do not even send in firearms warrantee cards.
 
Registration only tells those who want it where the good guy's guns are. Criminals don't/won't register their guns. So, what's the point except to tell the .gov where to go to confiscate them?
Click to expand...
. Registration and universal background checks would show when a gun moves from the legal world to the black market and help prosecute those people that provide guns into the black market and the hands of criminals. So yes, I support registration and universal background checks. The very real benefits to law enforcement outweigh the tiny risk of confiscation.
 
JSH1 said:
. Registration and universal background checks would show when a gun moves from the legal world to the black market and help prosecute those people that provide guns into the black market and the hands of criminals. So yes, I support registration and universal background checks. The very real benefits to law enforcement outweigh the tiny risk of confiscation.
Click to expand...


The first intelligent answer.
 
Registration and universal background checks would show when a gun moves from the legal world to the black market and help prosecute those people that provide guns into the black market and the hands of criminals. So yes, I support registration and universal background checks. The very real benefits to law enforcement outweigh the tiny risk of confiscation.
Click to expand...

I would say the risk is more than tiny, just because there is not the political will to do it now says nothing about the future. That being said I do think there are benefits and both help keep guns out of the hands of people that can't pass a background check, but our government just cannot be trusted to only use it for that.

I do believe we would have a hard time proving that registration is infringement if the issue ever got anywhere in the courts. It does not actually prevent anyone from owning anything by itself. Its therefore extremely important for us to fight the proposals before it ever becomes law.
 
The first intelligent answer.
Click to expand...

Charming.

Except it is based on several faulty assumptions.

First, that the black market is necessarily stocked by people who buy guns legally and sell them. As the drug war has demonstrated, that's absurd. Guns are easy to build and if there is a sufficient market someone will manufacture goods for that market.

Second, it ignores the fact that the existence of a black market is a sign that the regulatory approach has failed. Prohibition does not work.

Third, it ignores harm and cost.

It won't do what is claimed, any more than drug prohibition does, it will aid only in trying to react to the damage done by other regulation instead of reevaluating the cause of the problem, and it will cost a lot. You call that intelligent?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Aussie or UK Registration/Confiscation questions
Replies
2
Views
405
splithoof
S
K
  • Locked
CCW/CHL permits & TSA screening?
Replies
22
Views
2K
Ed Ames
E
J
  • Locked
Nebraska Mall shooting question...
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
Wes Janson
W
H
  • Locked
Question about Lung shots
Replies
16
Views
1K
Shifty
S
T
  • Locked
Instructions for filling out FFL application
Replies
1
Views
725
dukeofurl
D
Back
Top