Quantcast

Why Not Registering Your Guns is a Mistake

Discussion in 'Legal' started by BSA1, Sep 14, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Midwest

    Midwest Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Handguns are also registered in New Jersey

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Jersey

    "The NJ State police maintains a record of all handgun transfers, except for inherited firearms willed to the transferee. Firearm registration is voluntary, but since handgun purchase permits are also a form of register, there is de-facto mandatory handgun registration for handguns purchased in-state. *However, handguns purchased out of NJ are not required to be registred, not withholding banned weapons and local restrictions."
     
  2. Bobson

    Bobson Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    4,266
    Location:
    Kendall County, TX
    Deleted.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2013
  3. RetiredUSNChief

    RetiredUSNChief Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Messages:
    8,658
    Location:
    SC (Home), VA (Work)
    Please tell me this is a "Devil's Advocate" question...

    :scrutiny:
     
  4. Sam Cade

    Sam Cade Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Location:
    Rural Kentucky, surrounded by Amish
    You are conflating and confusing.
     
  5. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,244
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama

    Notice I said "of certain types."
    First, Wikipedia is a good source but it is not without mistakes.
    Second, I am quite certain that California did (1) register certain firearms then (2) ban some of those. There may be a complete or partial overlap of those two and your Dad's old sporter might have escaped the list or the fact he had it might have become lost in the bureaucracy.
    I am pretty certain California did this .... I just don't know if it would have affected your father's gun.

    There was also a third example of registration and then confiscation but I couldn't remember where it happened, so I didn't list it -- and it was America. This has happened in other countries, but I didn't consider those relevent.
     
  6. Torian

    Torian Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,016
    I'm quickly learning that responding to this thread at all is a lesson in futility.
     
  7. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Register yours. Leave mine alone. I may want to sell them to someone discretely, and I don't need your approval. I may want to keep them from some misguided bureaucrat. I may just prefer to be private and anonymous for many personal reasons. Don't pass any registration laws, as I will not comply. If there are others like me, that makes your "registration" useless.
     
  8. Jim K

    Jim K Member.

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,848
    Of course we trust the government to protect us. Anyone who doesn't agree will be shot.

    Jim
     
  9. Gordon
    • Contributing Member

    Gordon Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    9,811
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Registered my asshalt rifles with Ca. in 2000, promised they would be grandfathered in and paid good money for the fees. NOW the demonrats who control Kali want to break that contract and require me to pay again, remove the grandfathered in status and pay each year for a mental health review AND back ground check and newuter the guns with 10 round only mags allowed to posses. This time the answer for many of the disenfranchised owners will be Molon Lave and not one cent to fund DOJ door kickers. AND lots of smuglers will be making a great living when ammo permits go into effect with no internet sales.
     
  10. BSA1

    BSA1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,313
    Location:
    West of the Big Muddy, East of the Rockies and Nor
    Please tell me this is a "Devil's Advocate" question...

    No it’s not.

    This is a lot like chess game. Chess requires successful players to think several moves ahead of their opponent.

    It is intended to provoke thought into how current/proposed laws that pro-gun folk think is or would be good idea can come back to haunt us.

    Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, stated on April 13, 2013 that” we’re just not taking no for an answer.” She has previously stated that she doesn’t care if it takes 20 years to ban guns. The Libs have laid out long term strategy for eliminating ownership of guns and magazines. The have the media, the schools and time on their side.

    Americans, for example living in California, have freedom of choice when it comes to obeying the law(s). But choosing not to carries very high risks.

    It should provide plenty of food for thought about how important it is to change state laws and constitutions to protect our 2A rights rather than waiting to react when a anti-gun bill comes along.
     
  11. Midwest

    Midwest Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Location:
    Kentucky
    ^^^^^^^
    This
     
  12. gbran

    gbran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Location:
    california
    Registering guns would have no impact on the crime rate in America.

    Registering guns won't keep them out of the hands of criminals.
     
  13. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    It is worth recalling that what the signers did in 1776 was, shall we say, not allowed under English law.

    If there ever is a federal registry, short of a Constitutional amendment allowing it, ignoring it will be an act of patriotism. It is time for Americans to stand up.
     
  14. goon

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,250
    So the OP's primary argument is that since one anti-gun Representative "isn't taking no" for an answer, we're doomed? Our defeat is certain? We should just give up now, sell all our guns, and start playing hopscotch instead?
    I think not.

    If you act defeated, you are defeated. That's true in chess or checkers.
    So BSA1, stop acting defeated already. From where I'm standing, with a massive outpouring against recent attempts to pass more federal gun regulation, Heller v. D.C. reaffirming the 2nd as an individual right, and a million new NRA members, I don't see defeat as a foregone conclusion.
     
  15. another pake

    another pake Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2013
    Messages:
    335
    Location:
    Min ne sota, ya
    Guns?....what guns?
     
  16. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,288
    The purpose of registration is to exercise future control of some type over those guns. This future control often includes increased restrictions, partial bans, and forced compliance with additional anti-gun requirements.

    Many times when registration has not led to confiscation it has been because compliance was very low.

    Kicking in doors is relatively rare, this is because when they ban something people are known to have and must go through an official tracked policy (transfer and registration through an FFL in CA) to sell or give it to someone else, they can generally simply ask for it with the threat of many years imprisonment for non compliance and get the majority of citizens to turn them over.
    Then they can focus thier resources on the remaining minority.



    The downside to a lack of registration or claiming to not possess guns that one still has is that it is now illegal to own said weapons so using them recreationally, in home defense, having them found in a house fire, found when police are there for something unrelated, etc can result in criminal charges.
    This often means it is unsafe to transport them often or risk being caught with them, or to store them at home or someplace else that they could at some point be uncovered.
    So you cannot recreate with them, and should not have them immediately available in the home where they would certainly be found in a search either.
    Hidden or stored elsewhere, and illegal to be caught with defending or recreatiing makes them worthless for most things we own guns for.

    The only real use they have left at that point is offensive use.
    That is all guns that you don't have immediate access to and which you cannot be known to own are good for.
    That may still be partially consistent with a 2nd Amendment purpose, but takes all of the joy and most of the normal benefit out of owning them.
     
  17. BaltimoreBoy

    BaltimoreBoy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2009
    Messages:
    250
    My point:
    The anti's are not sufficiently Machiavellian to proceed as you suppose.

    Your counter:
    "Politics begin where the masses are, not where there are thousands, but where there are millions, that is where serious politics begin." Vladimir Lenin

    Sorry BSA1 - I don't even see the connection. There are millions on both sides of this issue, though it does seem that the elan of the pro-2A forces make their numbers count for more.

    The gist of your original post as I read it is that one should obey registration laws because the anti's will seize the property of those not in compliance and use that to make bad publicity for firearms owners making them the 'bad guys'.

    My first counter to that is that they are not that subtle. They just want to make things harder then move to confiscation later in a piecemeal fashion. Besides, they are true believers. They already know that we are the bad guys and there must be something wrong with you if you can't see it.

    My second counter is that the massive resistance of the Canadian gun owners actually defeated the Canadian gun registry. The government there repeatedly revised down the number of guns owned by the citizenry as it became evident that massive non-compliance was occuring. But eventually they had to throw in the towel and admit defeat.

    We may be witnessing something similar with respect to Marijuana law. The Feds still wanted strict prohibition. Several states have made it quasi-legal and now the Feds are trying to pretend that they aren't so strictly opposed. They don't want to be embarrassed by having somebody (the states in this case) thumb their nose at them.
     
  18. Midwest

    Midwest Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Not only is registering firearms a bad idea...registering gun owners is just as bad or worse. For instance Illinois requires all residents who possess firearms to have a Firearms Owners ID card which no matter how you cut it is a database of people who own firearms.

    The state could decide at some point to put more onerous burdens on those who possess the card. Those who cannot meet those onerous burdens will get a visit from the state to take away their firearms and the card.

    Illinois and California has been going to gun owners houses and confiscating firearms because the owners no longer meet the "requirements" to possess firearms. And just because the Canadian Gun Registry is supposedly history, maybe the guns aren't registered anymore...but Canadian Gun Owners Are In Fact Registered...
    -see below...Calgary...


    Gun Confiscation Squad in Chicago
    http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/index.php?cmd=news.article&articleID=5599


    The California Gun Confiscation Squad pays a visit
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=723704


    California is requiring REGISTRATION of citizens who want to purchase ammo.
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=725599



    New York City PD Demands Proof You Destroyed hi-cap magazines
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=722583



    So the Canadian Gun Registry is history...right? ...and yet we have this.....

    GUN CONFISCATION IN CALGARY BY RCMP BECAUSE OF FLOODING
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=720939


    And then we have this thought provoking post from this year.

    Is the U.S. or Ohio sharing concealed carry information with foreign govenments?
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=720870&p=8994758#post8994758



    Lets not forget this

    NY Bill Sets Up Ammo DB - Requires Manufacturers To Register & Report
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=720256
     
  19. itsa pain

    itsa pain member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,489
    was the OP's post taken off the sarah brady website? the only thing he said that made sense is there was no protest worth anything with the assault rifle bans in cali and ny
     
  20. Schwing

    Schwing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,265
    Location:
    Layton Utah
    There are already several examples the PROVE that it is a mistake to register your firearms. Look no further than England and Australia. Both required mandatory registration just a couple of decades before confiscation occurred. You don't have to look very far to find Australian officials who admit that they used registration as a tool for future confiscation.

    You do not have to look very far here in the U.S. to find similar attitudes. Even on youtube, you can find audio and video recordings of such illustrious folk as Pelosi, Kerry, Bloomberg, etc, admitting and, in some cases, proudly proclaiming that things such as magazine bans, registration, and taxation on firearms/ammo are merely baby steps towards their goal of complete confiscation.
     
  21. glockman19

    glockman19 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    3,700
    You sound like a Government Troll...

    NO FREE MAN has to follow any Unconstitutional Law.

    In California we just passed to the Governor SB374 that bans ALL semi-auto, center fire, magazine fed rifles. Registration of ALL LEGALLY purchased and possessed rifles must be registered by 7/1/2015.

    I will NOT register. I will defend my home and my property from "Actors or the State" who may attempt confiscation.

    I am willing to die for what I believe in...are you?

    Bring it on.
     
  22. goon

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,250
    I understand your sentiment, but sadly, even if your noncompliance resulted in a standoff and ultimately your imprisonment or death, what would it accomplish? You'd just be branded a nut by the media and the powers that be and locked up in a cage or tossed in a shallow grave.

    I'd instead beg you to get out of California and move somewhere where you'd be surrounded by people who share your point of view. This is a big country we live in. You don't have to live in a state that's just itching to lock you up over a couple pounds of sheet metal and springs. Stop funding their efforts to control with your own tax dollars.


    That is one of the biggest issues I have with proponents of gun control. They're unwilling to live and let live. They try to paint gun owners as bullies even as they'd gladly misuse the power of government to target us.

    But in California, they've got you.
    Better to move to Montana or Virginia and breathe free air.

    Don't become a statistic.
    Cross a border and live in peace instead.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2013
  23. BSA1

    BSA1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,313
    Location:
    West of the Big Muddy, East of the Rockies and Nor
    So the OP's primary argument is that since one anti-gun Representative "isn't taking no" for an answer, we're doomed?

    Humm NO. Please take time to read my original post.

    If you act defeated, you are defeated. That's true in chess or checkers.
    So BSA1, stop acting defeated already.


    Understanding the strategy of your enemies is not a sign of defeat. Patton did not defeat Rommel by waiting for Rommel to attack first and then react to the attack. Patton carefully studied Rommel strategies and tactics and then developed a battle plan and trained his forces on how to defeat him.

    From where I'm standing, with a massive outpouring against recent attempts to pass more federal gun regulation, Heller v. D.C. reaffirming the 2nd as an individual right, and a million new NRA members, I don't see defeat as a foregone conclusion.

    Heller is not as big as pro-gun victory as many believe. For example the Court left open the possibility in it’s decision that banning entire classes (types) of firearms may be legal.

    Thank you Zoogster. Another chess player.

    My point:
    The anti's are not sufficiently Machiavellian to proceed as you suppose.

    Your counter:
    "Politics begin where the masses are, not where there are thousands, but where there are millions, that is where serious politics begin." Vladimir Lenin

    Sorry BSA1 - I don't even see the connection. There are millions on both sides of this issue, though it does seem that the elan of the pro-2A forces make their numbers count for more.


    By rough count at least 71 million Americans had their firearm rights restricted by States in 2013. Where are the voices and actions of millions of pro-gun owners in those states?

    Midwest another chess player. Since most gun owners believe convicted felons should not be allowed to possess firearms all the police departments are enforcing the law by trying to seize guns from prohibited persons. After all you do believe felons should not possess guns don’t you?

    Glockman19. Your name calling is definitely not The High Road, your comments do not contribute to the discussion and only announce your intention publically to be a non-law abiding citizen.
     
  24. Midwest

    Midwest Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Location:
    Kentucky
    There have been cases where the state databases have been screwed up (and we had comments here on THR in the last couple of months) talking about exactly that on how NOT every person who ends up on the 'confiscation database' deserves to have their firearms confiscated due to some state screw up with similar sounding names, wrong addresses, wrong info or plain out of date info.

    If you think I am making this up or exaggerating please read
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=723704&page=2#27

    "The problem with this statement is that the OP is not addressing people who ARE prohibited, but rather people who may not be. Any CA members here who are in the know, are aware that the CA DOJ records are so messed up as to be almost completely useless. Many, many of their records show people possessing guns who actually do not, people possessing guns that are listed as one model but are actually entirely different. Serial numbers are wrong, names/dates/addresses are wrong and people with the same names are often confused in the databases.
    This puts a LOT of people at risk of having their 2A rights infringed or simply denied, due to a clerical error or outdated info.

    This is not a small problem. Its a HUGE problem."


    And in the case of expiring Firearm Owners ID cards the person may NOT have any criminal record,... but because they were late renewing their card, they can get their firearms confiscated. Firearm ID cards are not just an inconvenience...they should be illegal as they are an invasion of privacy and a infringement of the second amendment.

    Why should a person get their firearms rights taken away because of a damned card being late for renewal when they committed no felony, no domestic violence or have never been institutionalized



    Here is more info ..also from THR

    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=723704&page=2#32


    "I am a member on Calguns.net and there are many issues related to bad records on the part of the DOJ. One of the threads deals with DROS delays and denials, which is a huge problem right now. Many folks are being delayed or denied because of a 40 year old arrest (NOT conviction). Basically the DOJ is not just looking at your criminal record, but also your arrest record as well. If they don't have the "disposition" of that arrest, they withhold DROS. That individual then has to hunt up court records relating to that arrest to satisfy the DOJ.

    The Calguns folks suspect that this is an unconstitutional, intentional attempt to infringe on gun owners and 2A.

    The Calguns attorneys have filed a lawsuit against Kamala Harris (CA AG) directly because of these delays. I will link to that thread as soon as I can, unless Librarian chimes in before I get there."
     
  25. goon

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,250
    I did read your original post. Some of it didn't make much sense.

    Americans don't like crime. I don't like crime. What's that got to do with registration? Do you believe that registration reduces crime? Ask Chicago how that's working out.

    Do Americans generally respect the law? To a degree we respect it. To perhaps a greater degree, we fear what happens when it runs off on its own inertia and rolls right over top of us.

    Et cetera... et cetera... and so forth.

    Patton also did not win by deciding he should be scared and surrender because Rommel was pretty tough. He didn't much care that Rommel "wasn't taking no for an answer" either. Using Patton as an example of what to do when you're defeated doesn't stand... because he wasn't defeated.

    When I first started reading American Rifleman at the age of ten or so, one of the main arguments of the anti-gun crowd was that the Second Amendment did not identify an individual right. Even then, I thought that was crazy. Now that I understand how the Bill of Rights came to exist, I know that is crazy. And now, I have a SCOTUS decision that agrees with me. It also protects weapons "in common use." Every time one of us buys an AR-15 and ten magazines it gets a little more protected. That is a victory.

    Every state now has some provision for concealed carry. Even Illinois has been forced by the courts to respect the Second Amendment as an individual right that extends outside the home. That is progress.

    When I was a teenager, a ban was enacted on magazines holding more than ten rounds. This past spring, a ban much worse than that was defeated before it even left a Democrat controlled Senate. People on this very forum lamented that registration and bans on magazines and no more AK's were foregone conclusions... and they were wrong. They were wrong because we got pissed, then got organized, then sent money and called reps and senators and reminded them who they work for instead of just accepting that the anti-gun crowd wasn't taking no for an answer.

    There have been losses. If you want to equate it to a chess game, we have lost pieces in Colorado. I'd say we lost them in California and NY too, but the truth is that we lost them years ago in those states. Nothing short of dramatic court cases will save those states. Comply or don't... they're eventually going to get your guns.
    If you want to keep them, Montana is accessible by road or plane last I checked.

    You say hop on board and comply with whatever they throw at us.
    I say make them aware that forcing anything on us will come with a cost.
    It may just be election results such as those in the Colorado recall.
    It may be far worse. What happens if Colorado gun owners openly ignore the magazine capacity law and smuggle in a million PMags across CO's large borders? Especially with all but a few sheriffs plainly stating that they will not enforce this law.
    Do you honestly think that they're going to stick a hundred thousand people in CO in jail for not complying? I doubt it. Instead, what happens is government loses perceived power. People see that they can ignore laws and do what they want. Passing laws that people will not comply with is a mistake for government. If they had any sense, they'd repeal the laws in Colorado tomorrow before the People issue a de facto repeal for them.

    Non-compliance has its place. In CA, it will get you jail time. In CO, it just might work.

    But it can be an effective chess move, and one that a tactician such as yourself should be familiar with. Google Rosa Parks or the 1961 Barrow Duck In if you need a clearer lesson.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice