Firearms is a constiional right in this country so it is insane to be asking that records be kept on something American citizens have a constitutional right to.
People have a right to keep and bear arms, this is not the same as the right to do so completely anonymously.
How many crimes has firearm registration solved? How many crimes has firearm registration prevented? Surely if it did those things then there would be stories of firearm registrations preventing and solving crime.
Honestly, I am not suggesting a firearm registry in the hands of government. Currently there is a requirement for dealers to keep a record. Extending such a requirement to gun shows seems reasonable. I would be against government being able to get on-demand information on any gun-owner in the country, but current law does not do this and at the same time avoids unrecorded transactions.
Making someone show an ID at a airport is not going to prevent them from hijacking a plane nor do I think that's the intent of making someone show an ID to travel on plane.
The hell it isn't. If someone is a fugitive from justice, a person liable to hijack a plane, or a known terrorist operative than ID certainly will prevent them from hijacking the plane because they won't even be able to get on the plane.
I'm against that too. Armed passengers will take care of hijackers.
That's exactly what we need, a bunch of frightened people shooting off projectiles in a crowded space 30,000 feet in the air.
"Congress shall make no laws................"
They've already stepped all over that one, but that's no reason whatsoever to give them any more reach than they already have.
Dude, that is from the first amendment. The second says the right shall not be infringed.
Registering lawful abiding citizens has no effect on crime. Criminals will always use unregistered firearms for their crimes. Why would someone use their registered weapon as part of regular criminal activities??
This just shows your argument is based more on gut and emotion than actual facts. While most do not use a weapon they bought themselves a substantial portion do use their own weapons and a much larger portion use weapons someone close to them purchased. Either way knowing who owns the gun can point at the killer. If you suspect someone of killing a person and the gun used was registered to the suspect's brother then you have an obvious connection. Though, the figures are about a decade old most weapons used in federal crimes were either acquired from a legal source or through a close associate who did.
The 2nd Amendment has to do with keeping a vigilant eye on government just as much as it has to do with the rights of the individual, and part of keeping power over government means that it has zero right to know who holds the weapons.
I agree the 2nd Amendment is about offsetting government power. In fact, I would say that is its chief purpose. Yet at the same time one should understand how restricted that right was in the time it was written. The right to carry arms was not seen as applying to blacks and it was a matter of considerable controversy among whites whether they should have that right. Many favored racist gun control, that is, the people who were most oppressed by early American society were denied the ability and right to resist such oppression.
Essentially they were ok with people having guns so long as those people were not likely to use them against the elite.
We should NEVER demand photo ID to allow free people living in a free country to use commercial common carriers, be it planes, trains, automobiles, or bicycles built for two.
No one has a right to use a plane or a right to use a train. It is a privilege and as such requiring ID to use said privilege is perfectly acceptable.
Why SHOULD there be a record of it? Should we catalog ALL dangerous weapons? Should we create a registry for anything that can be used to make explosives?
Well, I imagine with bomb-making materials you could have something like what they do with meth assuming they don't already.
