Allserene - firearms ownership.

[General Geoff]

For instance, registering the serial number of my gun so it could be traced back, is not something I see as eroding my rights - I think it's a slap against gun thieves and criminals

Except that the supreme court has ruled that FELONS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO REGISTER THEIR GUNS, as that would be self incrimination and a violation of the 5th amendment.


If you want to register your guns, go right ahead. Don't tell me I have to register mine. The government is a lot better at stealing guns from law abiding citizens and/or murdering them, than random street thugs. Would you give street thugs your guns' serial numbers? No? Then why would you give them to the government?



And if that's not enough, gun registries do not help solve crimes nor do they reduce crime. Neither do background checks. The relevant crime rates have not appreciably changed since before the 1968 GCA, before which you could mail order a machine gun or 20mm cannon, directly to your doorstep, with no background checks, fingerprinting, or licensing.

 

[hso]

Imposing restrictions on the law abiding to control the behavior of criminals is easy, but meaningless. The law abiding will comply, HUZZAH! Success!!!, but the problem is that the criminals will not (see any recent statistics on gun crime in the UK), oh, RATS!

You traded what away for what?

Mindless, meaningless firearms concessions are like the cuckold finding used condoms in his bed and wondering about the spouse's housekeeping.

 

[allserene]

ok answering the two points:
I have no idea of how many crimes would be prevented by registration.
I have no idea what it would cost
It would help the Police in their criminal investigations -
example. 1

a woman is shot dead with a 9mm
her boyfriend who was arrested last week for punching her has a 9mm pistol registered in his name

example. 2

a woman is shot dead with a 9mm
her boyfriend who was arrested last week for punching her has no firearms registered in his name as firearms registration is not a requirement

Firearms registration has to be useful in detecting crime
The cost should be tiny - If it were contracted out to me, I could charge $5 per registration from the dealers and make a fortune
How many per hour could I enter into my computer

I got lost in Luxembourg once - as you know it borders France/Belgium/Holland/Germany - I thought I had come out into France but when I got to the supermarket checkout they asked for Belgian Francs. I offered British Pounds, Deutschmarks and French Francs - they made me leave the trolley - the kids were really hungry so I made a dash for France
Those were the days

 

[Cosmoline]

I can see that the stats of gun problems in the US are something that the Politicians will be forced to address.

The stats do not show a "gun problem." Nor do statistics sway policy in this country, as they do in Europe.

For instance, registering the serial number of my gun so it could be traced back, is not something I see as eroding my rights - I think it's a slap against gun thieves and criminals
and helps to get em jailed.

You're still thinking like an Englishman. It's unthinkable to trust the US Federal government with that kind of power over us. It would be a monumental intrusion not just into the RKBA but into the right to be free of searches without warrant. In that fight we'd have a lot of traditional liberals on our side. Remember this isn't some fussy little Bobby we're dealing with.

Firearms registration has to be useful in detecting crime

Firearm SN's are already traceable from the factory out to the last FFL dealer. Finding out who owned the thing is rarely a problem, but that also rarely tells you anything useful. That's because criminals prefer to use stolen firearms. If the users must register their arms, it isn't really the firearms being registered but the GUN OWNERS. Your "reasonable measure" would trigger a civil war.

 

[Shung]

and yet that vote came in at 5-4

^

not exactly.. look into what came in at 5-4... and look how was voted the rest..

 

[General Geoff]

allserene,

in your example 1, ownership of a 9mm pistol proves nothing. You still must establish motive, opportunity, and means.

In your example 2, why would the police NOT investigate and/or question the boyfriend simply because there's no firearms registration? That makes absolutely no sense.

 

[danprkr]

Who cares about all of that? In Luxembourg you can buy whatever you want? Book me on the next plane. Well, if I can figure out how to make a living there.

 

[browningguy]

I'll have to agree with the original poster on this one. I lived in the UK from 85-91, and I travel there several times a year to London and Aberdeen. I'd rather walk the streets of NYC at night than London.

The UK has devolved into a complete police state, 24 hour video surveillance of it's subjects, the police can stop and search anyone anywhere for any or no reason at all, and pocket knives are now heavily regulated since the kids started stabbing people on the streets just for fun. These are just a few well known examples in the UK.

We can only work hard to ensure our society doesn't disintegrate into an oppressice state like theirs has. And the answer is no, you cannot negotiate with anti's concerning our individual rights. The anti's and leftists only want to take, they will say absolutely anything, and make up any statistics they want, to get the complete disarmement of the "law abiding" public. When they have us disarmed then they can safely introduce a police state like the UK.

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.

 

[lykoris]

I got lost in Luxembourg once - as you know it borders France/Belgium/Holland/Germany

Luxembourg doesn't have any borders with Holland only France/Belgium/Germany.


if you're in favour of firearms registration then you are in favour of a national database(which as you well know has been a legal requirement in the UK for decades now for the law abiding citizen, registration of all firearms that is...along with a national database, they come as a package - like tea and biscuits).

The information is there, if you cared to question the reasoning behind registration, that it is ineffective in bringing criminals to justice and the costs far outweight any 'supposed' benefits.

How many criminals in the U.K. have been brought to justice over the last decades from registered firearms held by law abiding citizens?

Doesn't the cities of Washington, Chicago, NY have certain firearm registration requirements for firearms ? How effective have they been in catching criminals ?

none are so helplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.

I'm sure when registration was 1st suggested here everybody was convinced of its benefits against finding criminals and locking them away for their crimes. Imagine their surprise when everything capable of firing any form of projectile subsequently required registration - bow and arrows, caterpults, air guns, I am not joking. I can quote the law but it's in French.

and those are registration requirements in the same license I hold for .308 semi auto military rifles.

ahhhh the joy of registration, I'm still waiting for authorization papers to come back to be allowed to acquire another firearm...should be only another 3 months if I'm lucky before I can legally take possession. Until then I have to wait for my paperwork.

Gun control laws or firearm legislation(I think this term sounds friendlier) only serve to hinder the law abiding citizen in the overwhelming majority of cases.

I'm fortunate to live in a country that has really relaxed laws(by EU standards) but that is changing thanks to EU directives which have more power over national laws. No surprise there, it's all downhill from here.

Tow the line comrade. I hope you have read that history of England because it illustrates that by subvertion it is possible to achieve anything - to go from zero gun control laws to a plethora of rules/restrictions/regulations/paperwork i.e. don't assume the 2A will always be there if you don't vigorously defend it.

Wasn't it Reagon that said freedom was never more than a generation away.

I suggest you read as much as you can and form your own opinion as to the merits of firearm legislation.

Good night!

 

[Gryffydd]

Washington State has made it illegal to open carry where someone can be alarmed.

Nope.

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

A holstered gun carried peaceably does not meet that definition.
You should take a look at the Washington Open Carry forum.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/