can someone tell me any objective benefit of gun registration?[W488, 1267]

[rhinefire]

opinion noted-again rejected

Typical reply with void of thought.

 

[TurtleDude]

Your fundamental error is in assuming a Constitutional amendment is necessary. It is not. States already have registration and a national one is well under the powers of Congress in the Constitution as it stands today.

no it isn't because under the Lopez decision, registering weapons currently possessed that no longer move in interstate commerce (indeed private owners are prohibited from selling or transferring their weapons in INTER state commerce) is most likely to be found to not create federal jurisdiction

and under Heller, I doubt the burden of proof could be met even if some court were to ignore Lopez

 

[TurtleDude]

Typical reply with void of thought.

so you believe his comments were thoughtful? or are you one of those Pro gun control "Conservatives"

 

[TurtleDude]

I am going to throw out this in response, when any person calls another stupid for an opinion yet is unable to offer anything in the form of a rebuttal the term "stupid" applies to the one most deserving of it. As a pro gun advocate I like to think there are people we can trust and rely on to aid our cause but judging by TrutleDude we need to do a better job of recruiting.

actually I doubt you will ever meet anyone who knows more about this subject than I do

maybe you are upset you don't know as much as I do but you certainly don't know the history of me on this board

and you deny that the gun banners are engaged in an incremental effort to ban guns? that is what I was denying. You support that claim that the current effort to register guns is not a stepping stone?

 

[LaMidRighter]

no it isn't because under the Lopez decision, registering weapons currently possessed that no longer move in interstate commerce (indeed private owners are prohibited from selling or transferring their weapons in INTER state commerce) is most likely to be found to not create federal jurisdiction

and under Heller, I doubt the burden of proof could be met even if some court were to ignore Lopez

It's funny to watch the "Whatever we say is constitutional" arguments even in light of the very plain language to the contrary, people with agendas really do make me laugh.

 

[TurtleDude]

It's funny to watch the "Whatever we say is constitutional" arguments even in light of the very plain language to the contrary, people with agendas really do make me laugh.

people who hate rights but love big government tend to despise anything that stands in the way of unbridled government power driven by mob mentality

 

[Jerry]

Since criminals and others who cannot legally own a gun cannot be forced-pursuant to the fifth amendment-to register a weapon they possess?

If it weren't for all the gun grabbers....registration could fund actual enforcement of the law....but the ATF doesn't enforce the law....and registration could help a stolen gun be returned to it's rightful owner.

It really sucks that gun grabbers are ruining valid militia regulations.

 

[TurtleDude]

If it weren't for all the gun grabbers....registration could fund actual enforcement of the law....but the ATF doesn't enforce the law....and registration could help a stolen gun be returned to it's rightful owner.

It really sucks that gun grabbers are ruining valid militia regulations.

there is no valid reason for private citizens to have to register a gun.

I can see a requirement that if you are in the militia and might be called up that you POSSESS say the standard militia weapon (or better yet-be supplied one by the entity that commands the militia)

 

[LaMidRighter]

If it weren't for all the gun grabbers....registration could fund actual enforcement of the law....but the ATF doesn't enforce the law....and registration could help a stolen gun be returned to it's rightful owner.

It really sucks that gun grabbers are ruining valid militia regulations.

The problem is that with serial numbers, a registry is not necessary. The other problem, as you have pointed out is that there is no credibility or trust left to be had in the anti-gun movement, they've shown themselves to be uneducated on the fundamentals of the issue and dishonest in their intentions and applications, there is no compromise to be had with them.

 

[TurtleDude]

The problem is that with serial numbers, a registry is not necessary. The other problem, as you have pointed out is that there is no credibility or trust left to be had in the anti-gun movement, they've shown themselves to be uneducated on the fundamentals of the issue and dishonest in their intentions and applications, there is no compromise to be had with them.

if your gun is stolen, you merely need report it stolen, and all the "benefits" the gun grabbers serve up as a facade for their true reasons, are accomplished by such a report with NONE of the potential evils

 

[LaMidRighter]

if your gun is stolen, you merely need report it stolen, and all the "benefits" the gun grabbers serve up as a facade for their true reasons, are accomplished by such a report with NONE of the potential evils

Exactly, thing is, if a criminal is smart enough to file my gun if he should actually find and steal it then it won't matter if it's registered or not, I won't see it again because it would be untraceable. It's already a felony to steal a firearm, and a separate felony to file a gun, so a criminal willing to do both won't be affected by a registry law already.

 

[danielpalos]

What are the benefits of registering an automobile and requiring a license to operate it legally in public venues?

 

[BretJ]

What are the benefits of registering an automobile and requiring a license to operate it legally in public venues?

A vehicle does not require registration if used on private property. By using publicly funded roadways, you enter into an agreement With the state that you will register your vehicle and obtain a license in order to use those roadways. The money generated is used to maintain those roadways and law enforcement. Of course, lots of criminals and others use those roadways without licensing and registration, but there are penalties for that if they get caught.

 

[BretJ]

Exactly, thing is, if a criminal is smart enough to file my gun if he should actually find and steal it then it won't matter if it's registered or not, I won't see it again because it would be untraceable. It's already a felony to steal a firearm, and a separate felony to file a gun, so a criminal willing to do both won't be affected by a registry law already.

Even if you file away the serial number, in most cases it can be read if there is sufficient motivation to do so.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Even if you file away the serial number, in most cases it can be read if there is sufficient motivation to do so.

To an extent that is true. Mine has a SN tag on it that just would have to be removed, or a person who wanted to permanently rid it could do a more thorough shave down or take the entire area out where the number is for stamped numbers.

 

[TurtleDude]

A vehicle does not require registration if used on private property. By using publicly funded roadways, you enter into an agreement With the state that you will register your vehicle and obtain a license in order to use those roadways. The money generated is used to maintain those roadways and law enforcement. Of course, lots of criminals and others use those roadways without licensing and registration, but there are penalties for that if they get caught.

its a revenue system

and no one has suggested (other than perhaps Al Gore) that automobiles be limited to state or government employees. No one is seriously trying to use car registration to confiscate or limit car ownership

and the right to keep and drive cars on the public right away is not a right recognized by the BoR

this silly argument trying to equate car registration with firearms registration has been napalmed so many times that the ashes of the stupidity could fill a football stadium

 

[BretJ]

To an extent that is true. Mine has a SN tag on it that just would have to be removed, or a person who wanted to permanently rid it could do a more thorough shave down or take the entire area out where the number is for stamped numbers.

But wait! Why would anyone do that? That is illegal!

 

[danielpalos]

A vehicle does not require registration if used on private property. By using publicly funded roadways, you enter into an agreement With the state that you will register your vehicle and obtain a license in order to use those roadways. The money generated is used to maintain those roadways and law enforcement. Of course, lots of criminals and others use those roadways without licensing and registration, but there are penalties for that if they get caught.

That is a disingenuous argument since the public sector should have no reason to bother you as a civil Person in our republic if you keep your Arms on private property.

 

[BretJ]

Weirdness abounds. You asked a question and received a straightforward answer. What made it disingenuous? (You need to work the kinks out of that subroutine. As it stands, your subroutine would almost pass as a real-live anti-firearm fanatic but it is still just a wee bit too illogical to pass as a real person.

 

[danielpalos]

Weirdness abounds. You asked a question and received a straightforward answer. What made it disingenuous? (You need to work the kinks out of that subroutine. As it stands, your subroutine would almost pass as a real-live anti-firearm fanatic but it is still just a wee bit too illogical to pass as a real person.

How many people are not going to use public goods and public services while keeping and bearing Arms?

 

[Jerry]

What are the benefits of registering an automobile and requiring a license to operate it legally in public venues?

If we treated guns like cars...

• You can sell any vehicle you own to literally anyone you want without having to go through a licensed dealer, so no one would ever have to use an FFL to sell a gun.
  
  
• No background checks to buy, sell, own or posses any firearm.
  
  
• No license needed to own, possess or operate any kind of firearm on personal property.
  
  
• License is "shall Issue", does not require a background check, but does require 16hr class, knowledge and practical handling/qualification, and has passport quality photo, bio-metric data, description of holder and address.
  
  
• Just as there are difference classes of drivers license there could be different gun licenses as well. A Class-1 allows you to operate all Class-1 weapons, which according to the ATF is most pistols and rifles. A Class-2 allows you to operate as a pawn broker. A Class-3 allows you to operate assault rifles and machine guns. And so forth. All of these classes are to be available to anyone with the time and money to get them without ever having to present a 'need'.
  
  
• License is good in all 50 states; no state my refuse to honor a lawfully acquired license or otherwise restrict the operation of a lawfully possessed firearm. If someone in farm country wants to bring his legally owned machine gun to downtown Chicago, this has to be allowed.
  
  
• All firearms are titled and registered with the local Clerk of Courts.
  
  
• A firearm must have at least basic liability insurance in order to be operated on public property, but no insurance if only operated on private property. Different classes of firearm may require different levels of insurance. A gun license for artillery will also require an annual physical, which is the equivalent of a DoT Medical Card for a Class-A CDL.
  
  
• Criminal conviction, even murder, does not stop you from continuing to buy, own or possess any firearm; you are only barred from operating a firearm in public.

All of the above is true for drivers licenses today, even-though far more people are killed by vehicles than guns.

 

[danielpalos]

If we treated guns like cars...

• You can sell any vehicle you own to literally anyone you want without having to go through a licensed dealer, so no one would ever have to use an FFL to sell a gun.
  
  
• No background checks to buy, sell, own or posses any firearm.
  
  
• No license needed to own, possess or operate any kind of firearm on personal property.
  
  
• License is "shall Issue", does not require a background check, but does require 16hr class, knowledge and practical handling/qualification, and has passport quality photo, bio-metric data, description of holder and address.
  
  
• Just as there are difference classes of drivers license there could be different gun licenses as well. A Class-1 allows you to operate all Class-1 weapons, which according to the ATF is most pistols and rifles. A Class-2 allows you to operate as a pawn broker. A Class-3 allows you to operate assault rifles and machine guns. And so forth. All of these classes are to be available to anyone with the time and money to get them without ever having to present a 'need'.
  
  
• License is good in all 50 states; no state my refuse to honor a lawfully acquired license or otherwise restrict the operation of a lawfully possessed firearm. If someone in farm country wants to bring his legally owned machine gun to downtown Chicago, this has to be allowed.
  
  
• All firearms are titled and registered with the local Clerk of Courts.
  
  
• A firearm must have at least basic liability insurance in order to be operated on public property, but no insurance if only operated on private property. Different classes of firearm may require different levels of insurance. A gun license for artillery will also require an annual physical, which is the equivalent of a DoT Medical Card for a Class-A CDL.
  
  
• Criminal conviction, even murder, does not stop you from continuing to buy, own or possess any firearm; you are only barred from operating a firearm in public.

All of the above is true for drivers licenses today, even-though far more people are killed by vehicles than guns.

I don't believe we would be worse off.

 

[Crimefree]

Your fundamental error is in assuming a Constitutional amendment is necessary. It is not. States already have registration and a national one is well under the powers of Congress in the Constitution as it stands today.

A firm belief in monkey see monkey do as a form of proof. Hitler would have been proud and thankful of such support.

 

[Crimefree]

I don't believe we would be worse off.

Who cares what you believe. Fact is any of those would be an infringement of the constitution. Last I heard promoting unconstitutional laws and action was kinda thought of as NOT NICE.

 

[Crimefree]

How many people are not going to use public goods and public services while keeping and bearing Arms?

Irrelevant.