If you have to register cars, you should have to register guns!

[dfaugh]

Well, think of it this way:

I can go buy a car from a private owner (and at least some dealers):

LEGALLY I'm supposed to register it, and (in my state) insure it.

But, I could just drive it (with a set of expired or stolen plates for example)....

I may not have a drivers license, or it may have been revoked.

I'm breaking several laws at this point, but that doesn't stop me from doing it.

So, to continue the analogy:

If a criminal (or anyone, for that matter) wants to have a gun, he can get it. Requiring registration certainly isn't going to stop someone form owning a gun, any more than "requiring" car registration is gonna stop anyone from driving illegally if they choose.

P.S. I used to work for a towing company years ago, that towed for all of the local police agencies. We towed at least 3-4 unregistered/unlicensed/uninsured vehicles EVERY DAY. So what good does "requiring" registration do?

 

[v8fbird]

"Also, the 4473 form you fill out for an FFL sale is NOT a registration document"


Apparently you've never seen the movie Red Dawn.

 

[armoredman]

Yes, it's a MOVIE. If invaded, invite your local FFL to "light up" his records.

 

[leadcounsel]

Driving is a privilege which can be taken away by the state. There is no right to car ownership or driiving.

Conversely, gun ownership is a guaranteed right (which has been infringed admittedly).

It's really that simple.

 

[kludge]

Also, the 4473 form you fill out for an FFL sale is NOT a registration document - it stays at the dealer, and after 25 years, it's shredded. ATFE can "forward trace" through them, if the FFL knuckles under, but IIRC, ATFE got spanked for that more than once, and may have stopped trying to do that.

Along with our lifetime handgun license law that just went into effect, we also got this...

SECTION 7. IC 35-47-2.5-3 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2006]: Sec. 3.

--remove this--
(a) Notwithstanding any other law, a person purchasing a handgun from a dealer shall consent in writing, on a form to be provided by the superintendent, to have the dealer obtain criminal history information.
(b) The form shall include, in addition to the information required by section 4 of this chapter, the same information required to be included on the firearms transaction record required by federal regulations administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms of the United States Department of the Treasury. However, the form may not include any information related to the handgun.
(c) The copies of the forms shall be mailed or delivered to the state police department before the last day of the month following the sale.

--insert this--
(a) A person purchasing a handgun from a dealer shall complete and sign Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Form 4473.
(b) The dealer shall forward a copy of Form 4473 signed by the purchaser to the state police department before the last day of the month following the sale.


Now I wonder why they did that?

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

It's USE verses POSSESSION

Just as there are no laws governing what kind or how many automobiles you may possess, the use of those autos may and should be governed for public safety and flow of traffic concerns. The number and kind of autos you might own is harmless.

It is the same for our arms. The number and type of arms you possess is harmless. It is only their misuse that is of concern, therefore, it is permissible, and in fact prudent, to govern certain aspects of their use. They should never be "registered" - or even taxed - because the possession and bearing of arms is supposed to be left uninfringed as required by the Second Amendment.

Woody

A law that says you cannot fire your gun in the middle of downtown unless in self defense is not unconstitutional. Laws that prohibit brandishing except in self defense or handling your gun in a threatening or unsafe manner would not be unconstitutional. Laws can be written that govern some of the uses of guns. No law can be written that infringes upon buying, keeping, storing, carrying, limiting caliber, limiting capacity, limiting quantity, limiting action, or any other limit that would infringe upon the keeping or bearing of arms. That is the truth and simple reality of the limits placed upon government by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. B.E.Wood

 

[v8fbird]

"Driving is a privilege which can be taken away by the state. There is no right to car ownership or driiving."

Why, because the state says so? Do you have a right to own your home? Because that isn't in the Constitution either. Do you have a right to privacy? The right to travel?

"Conversely, gun ownership is a guaranteed right (which has been infringed admittedly). It's really that simple."

Your argument is that you have one NATURAL right because some GUY wrote it on some piece of PAPER. "Conversely," your argument to why we DON'T have other natural rights is that some GUY DIDN'T write them on some piece of PAPER.





[What law school did you go to?]

 

[Carl N. Brown]

If some people had their way, you would have to have a license
to inhale oxygen, a permit to exhale co2 and file an environmental
iimpact statement every time you went do the bathroom. We
would all die leaving behind a mound of government paperwork
the size of Mt Rushmore.

We should say NO MORE! SAVE the trees!
Let them grow green and free, and not
be ground to pulp for paper!

 

[deanf]

If I am required to register my gun as my car, then I expect the same privileges in regards to where I can possess and operate my gun.

I expect to be able to carry my gun in all public places in all states, just like I can drive my registered car all all public roads in all states.

 

[ixl4]

automobiles are a privelege, not a right. it is up to the state to permit you do use that state's (even though mostly funded by the populace) infrastructure.

You get licensed to enjoy that priveledge.

Guns are your right, given to you by God, and the state may not INFRINGE on that God-given right.

Clear and simple.

 

[gunsmith]

ooh great! background checks for drivers!

no more felons driving! you can't own a car if you are convicted of domestic violence...
I think this will do more to ease traffic then high gas prices.

I used this argument with a truck driver I knew who was anti gun and a felon
when he started in with the driver/gun license argument.

I said, ok! great! no truck operator should have any felonies...great!

He shut up quick!