A gun registration program

[micfranklin]

If there were a program in the U.S. for this, would you be happy if there was a gun registration program that required all gun owners to register their guns to the government?

I know I wouldn't.

[Oedipus Rex]

If there were a program in the U.S. for this, would you be happy if there was a gun registration program that required all gun owners to register their guns to the government?

I know I wouldn't.


It is illegal to have a national database for gun registration. It was last tried under the Carter Administration and the BATF was almost shut down after Congress threatened to cut their funding.

If you want to know the reasoning behind not having a national database, just look at what happened in Great Britain, Cuba, China, the former Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, etc.

[Cobra]

No national database, really bad idea. It would give the feds just that much more power over everyday citizens lives and violates people's right to privacy

[micfranklin]

Once I buy a gun, its mine and there should be no tracking of my weapon at all.

[Labrocca]

I am all for gun rights but at the same time. Maybe legal gun owners and ordinary citizens might be better protected if guns were registered in a national database..and I will go 1 step further. Each should have 1 bullet fired and taken as possible forensic evidence in case a crime is committed with that gun.Â*Â*This could be done at the factory even.

I personally don't see how a gun registry is a problem. If you think a gun registry is wrong then you must also believe a child-molestor registry is wrong as well.Â*Â*Obviously that has the same type of privacy issues.Â*Â*Not exactly the same...but similar at least.Â*Â*The idea is to have pre-knowledge in case a crime is committed in the future.Â*Â*To also warn surrounding citizens of the dangers.

It would be interesting to see a website showing WHO in my neighborhood had a gun.
It would be interesting to see a website showing WHO in my neighborhood had a felony conviction.

Do you see how similar these statements are?

Personally I see many gun owners add stickers to their doors to warn burglars. Imagine if burglars could look up and see you owned 3 guns...it might make them target another house instead. :) Which might make MORE people buy guns.

[underdawg]

I agree with you on this Labrocca

[Cobra]

If you think a gun registry is wrong then you must also believe a child-molestor registry is wrong as well.Â*Â*Obviously that has the same type of privacy issues.Â*Â*Not exactly the same...but similar at least.Â*Â*The idea is to have pre-knowledge in case a crime is committed in the future.Â*Â*To also warn surrounding citizens of the dangers.
True but the big difference is child molesters have already committed a crime in the first place, so there is reason to monitor them. Gun owners haven't but the government is treating them as if they are as dangerous as child molesters and need watching.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I would prefer a no-gun registry, yard signs saying "gun free home" would be a nice addition, especially if I ever choose to become a midnight rambler.

[Oedipus Rex]

Here is the biggest flaw in a national gun registry. It only registers those who've legally purchased firearms. Gun laws only target the law abiding. Just how many criminals do you know who will register a firearm purchased off the street or obtained in a trade?

Do you realize that the waiting period only applies to licensed firearms dealers? No paperwork is done when a private citizen sells their weapons. BIG LOOPHOLE.

This is another angle... why must a citizen prove to the government that they're eligible to have their 2nd Amendment right? Do we require a reporter, politician, rabbi, etc. to prove they're worthy of their 1st Amendment rights?


A felon child molester already has their right to vote or own a firearm severed. That's part of the punishment process for their crime. What crime is a law abiding citizen guilt of that they should have their rights contested?

[Labrocca]

The argument for a child-molestor registry is to protect the innocent..not to punish the guilty. That's why it got pass the courts. The same could be said of a gun registry.

Also I mentioned saving a fired round from the factory. This is to combat illegally used firearms as well as the source of the gun can be traced. I am sure "private owners" are actually just "private dealers". There are always ways around laws. A gun registry may just help and deter those selling guns privately as it will force private dealers to report sales and WHO the new owner is. The same applies for all vehicles and I am not sure why firearms couldn't have the same rules applied. This doesn't prevent the 2nd amendment at all.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I agree, also DNA samples could be collected at birth and all people registered, to protect the innocent.

When you think about it, if it saves one child, it's worth it!

[Oedipus Rex]

The argument for a child-molestor registry is to protect the innocent..not to punish the guilty. That's why it got pass the courts. The same could be said of a gun registry.

Also I mentioned saving a fired round from the factory. This is to combat illegally used firearms as well as the source of the gun can be traced. I am sure "private owners" are actually just "private dealers". There are always ways around laws. A gun registry may just help and deter those selling guns privately as it will force private dealers to report sales and WHO the new owner is. The same applies for all vehicles and I am not sure why firearms couldn't have the same rules applied. This doesn't prevent the 2nd amendment at all.


What good would that do?

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf

It is said that there are over 200 million firearms in America (as of May 1997). How does one get a fired round from each of those weapons?

Also, it is so very easy to modify a firearm so that the ballistic signature from a factory spent round means nothing. Part of the forensics used to trace a weapon includes the firing pin impression (easily removed and replace) and the lands/grooves on a bullet (barrel is easily replace).

[BoogyMan]

Gun registration is little more than a step towards oppression in my view.Â*Â*Consider the gun control efforts of Adolf Hitler.Â*Â*In March of 1938 the nazi government of Hitler created a weapons law that greatly expanded the previous Weimar Republic gun control laws and made it illegal for a Jew to have any kind of involvement in the firearms business.

Later that same year in November, government mobs attacked Jews all over Germany in the Kristellnacht. The German government used the administrative authority of the 1938 Weapons Law to require immediate Jewish surrender of all firearms and edged weapons, and to mandate a sentence of death or 20 years in a concentration camp for any violation.

I am not saying that such a harsh and horrible thing would happen in this country, but it could.

The gun laws put in place in 1938 by the nazi regime simply gave the government enough information and enough discretion to ensure that victims inside Germany would not be able to fight back.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Also, it is so very easy to modify a firearm so that the ballistic signature from a factory spent round means nothing. Part of the forensics used to trace a weapon includes the firing pin impression (easily removed and replace) and the lands/grooves on a bullet (barrel is easily replace).


About 500 rounds is enough to change the ballistic signature of a gun. Considering I used to put 200 rounds or so a month through my guns when I used to practice, I'm sure that a factory round wouldn't match.

[Oedipus Rex]

Also, it is so very easy to modify a firearm so that the ballistic signature from a factory spent round means nothing. Part of the forensics used to trace a weapon includes the firing pin impression (easily removed and replace) and the lands/grooves on a bullet (barrel is easily replace).


About 500 rounds is enough to change the ballistic signature of a gun. Considering I used to put 200 rounds or so a month through my guns when I used to practice, I'm sure that a factory round wouldn't match.


I've modified several of my weapons. I also make 'drop in' replacement parts. Heck, I could make the whole damned gun if I really wanted to put the effort into it. But, alas... no... I'm really into making custom air powered machine guns for myself and some of my closest friends. :D

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I'm a knife guy these days, trained in silat. Nice and quiet and not hard to get.

[firefox]

Cool I have a boot-knife and a few others myself. No firearms yet, but I'll have one in New Hampshire in a couple of years!

[Oedipus Rex]

Cool I have a boot-knife and a few others myself. No firearms yet, but I'll have one in New Hampshire in a couple of years!


Are you under aged or just live in a gun grabber state?

[Labrocca]

I have a great knife collection as well. You all make good points why a gun registry is useless. Oh well..I guess I lose this round (pun intended).

[firefox]

Cool I have a boot-knife and a few others myself. No firearms yet, but I'll have one in New Hampshire in a couple of years!


Are you under aged or just live in a gun grabber state?


I'm 21 and on the west coast.

[Oedipus Rex]

Cool I have a boot-knife and a few others myself. No firearms yet, but I'll have one in New Hampshire in a couple of years!


Are you under aged or just live in a gun grabber state?


I'm 21 and on the west coast.


Let me guess... California?

[micfranklin]

I agree, also DNA samples could be collected at birth and all people registered, to protect the innocent.

When you think about it, if it saves one child, it's worth it!


I hope you're not serious about this, are you?

[firefox]

Let me guess... California?


Yes how did you know?! ;) Yet another reason to move to NH...

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

I agree, also DNA samples could be collected at birth and all people registered, to protect the innocent.

When you think about it, if it saves one child, it's worth it!


I hope you're not serious about this, are you?


Why not? A library of every citizens DNA could lead to rapid determination and apprehension of guilty persons in many violent crimes. By collecting it at birth it could help identify your status as a legal citizen, and it could be used to track visitors to the US, insure their true identity, once DNA testing technology becomes faster and cheaper.

What's wrong with that?

[Oedipus Rex]

Let me guess... California?


Yes how did you know?! ;) Yet another reason to move to NH...


Its no mistake that California is known as the Left Coast.

[micfranklin]

I agree, also DNA samples could be collected at birth and all people registered, to protect the innocent.

When you think about it, if it saves one child, it's worth it!


I hope you're not serious about this, are you?


Why not? A library of every citizens DNA could lead to rapid determination and apprehension of guilty persons in many violent crimes. By collecting it at birth it could help identify your status as a legal citizen, and it could be used to track visitors to the US, insure their true identity, once DNA testing technology becomes faster and cheaper.

What's wrong with that?


It's an invasion of privacy, one, and number two, it seems like the people would be forced into giving their DNA out against their wishes. It gets four thumbs down from me.

[Oedipus Rex]

I agree, also DNA samples could be collected at birth and all people registered, to protect the innocent.

When you think about it, if it saves one child, it's worth it!


I hope you're not serious about this, are you?


Why not? A library of every citizens DNA could lead to rapid determination and apprehension of guilty persons in many violent crimes. By collecting it at birth it could help identify your status as a legal citizen, and it could be used to track visitors to the US, insure their true identity, once DNA testing technology becomes faster and cheaper.

What's wrong with that?


It's an invasion of privacy, one, and number two, it seems like the people would be forced into giving their DNA out against their wishes. It gets four thumbs down from me.


Do you agree that people have 2nd amendment rights?

[micfranklin]

I agree, also DNA samples could be collected at birth and all people registered, to protect the innocent.

When you think about it, if it saves one child, it's worth it!


I hope you're not serious about this, are you?


Why not? A library of every citizens DNA could lead to rapid determination and apprehension of guilty persons in many violent crimes. By collecting it at birth it could help identify your status as a legal citizen, and it could be used to track visitors to the US, insure their true identity, once DNA testing technology becomes faster and cheaper.

What's wrong with that?


It's an invasion of privacy, one, and number two, it seems like the people would be forced into giving their DNA out against their wishes. It gets four thumbs down from me.


Do you agree that people have 2nd amendment rights?


Absolutely.