• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Registration

Would you Register Your Firearms

  • Total voters
    31
  • Poll closed .
Casper said:
Not sure how it would stop gun smuggling, which is already against the law and how on earth would it stop smuggling guns out of the countries, you make statements but I see nothing that explains them, the Devil is in the Details.

Actually it is the main reason for registration, Canada already tried it and it ad no impact. So there ya go.
Click to expand...

Canada doesn't have (and AFAIK has never had) a huge problem with gun smuggling. America does.

Registration wouldn't stop gun smuggling, but it would significantly decrease gun smuggling. How? Because right now, when illegally-possessed firearms are confiscated after a crime, there's no real way to know how that firearm went from legal owner to illegal possessor. With registration, there is an identifiable chain of custody (just like with cars)...and so the ATF can walk up to Joe Schmuck and ask him, "Exactly how is it that your legally-owned firearm got into the hands of this criminal? You didn't inform us that you sold it or that it was stolen, and so that means that you are now being investigated for gun smuggling."

You see, with registration, you must inform the police when you sell or donate a firearm (but that can only be done if the new owner is legally allowed to own that firearm and that firearm is immediately registered in the new owner's name)...or if that firearm is either stolen or destroyed. What's more, just like with cars, the registered owner is held responsible for whatever is done with his firearms...which means that (just like with his car) he's got to keep it out of the hands of his kids, he's got to keep it safe, and he's got to report it if it's stolen.

Do all that, and gun smuggling will plummet...because then the smugglers are easily identified, prosecuted, and jailed.

But don't worry - this will not happen in our lifetimes since the gun manufacturers know full well that this would cost them tens of millions of dollars in annual revenue, and so they (and their puppet the NRA) would make damn sure that they would politically crucify any Republican who dared support such gun-control measures that work so well for most of the rest of the first-world democracies. After all, since when should we give a damn about the lives of the thousands of innocent men, women, and children that we lose every year to gun violence? The revenues and profits of the gun manufacturers are FAR more important, right? 'Murica!
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Canada doesn't have (and AFAIK has never had) a huge problem with gun smuggling. America does.

Registration wouldn't stop gun smuggling, but it would significantly decrease gun smuggling. How? Because right now, when illegally-possessed firearms are confiscated after a crime, there's no real way to know how that firearm went from legal owner to illegal possessor. With registration, there is an identifiable chain of custody (just like with cars)...and so the ATF can walk up to Joe Schmuck and ask him, "Exactly how is it that your legally-owned firearm got into the hands of this criminal? You didn't inform us that you sold it or that it was stolen, and so that means that you are now being investigated for gun smuggling."

You see, with registration, you must inform the police when you sell or donate a firearm (but that can only be done if the new owner is legally allowed to own that firearm and that firearm is immediately registered in the new owner's name)...or if that firearm is either stolen or destroyed. What's more, just like with cars, the registered owner is held responsible for whatever is done with his firearms...which means that (just like with his car) he's got to keep it out of the hands of his kids, he's got to keep it safe, and he's got to report it if it's stolen.

Do all that, and gun smuggling will plummet...because then the smugglers are easily identified, prosecuted, and jailed.

But don't worry - this will not happen in our lifetimes since the gun manufacturers know full well that this would cost them tens of millions of dollars in annual revenue, and so they (and their puppet the NRA) would make damn sure that they would politically crucify any Republican who dared support such gun-control measures that work so well for most of the rest of the first-world democracies. After all, since when should we give a damn about the lives of the thousands of innocent men, women, and children that we lose every year to gun violence? The revenues and profits of the gun manufacturers are FAR more important, right? 'Murica!
Click to expand...

more proof your real animus is towards the NRA and pro gun voters rather than violent criminals. And like many lefties-the concept of Profit bothers you. Registration is proof anti gun activists are all about harassing honest gun owners since criminals cannot even be prosecuted for failing to register their firearms
 
Casper said:
Actually they are not, the paper work is only kept a short time them discarded, there is no Nation Database.
Click to expand...

In Virginia, the paperwork regarding background check and sale is kept physically by the dealer for 5 years then destroyed. There is no database. In NC you get your purchase permit from the sheriff and one background check serves for up to 20 permits at a time. There is no state database.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Canada doesn't have (and AFAIK has never had) a huge problem with gun smuggling. America does.

Registration wouldn't stop gun smuggling, but it would significantly decrease gun smuggling. How? Because right now, when illegally-possessed firearms are confiscated after a crime, there's no real way to know how that firearm went from legal owner to illegal possessor. With registration, there is an identifiable chain of custody (just like with cars)...and so the ATF can walk up to Joe Schmuck and ask him, "Exactly how is it that your legally-owned firearm got into the hands of this criminal? You didn't inform us that you sold it or that it was stolen, and so that means that you are now being investigated for gun smuggling."
Click to expand...

How does that stop smuggling?

And how does knowing if a firearm went to and from someone legally or not prevent gun crime? Anyone that 'intentionally' provides a firearm to someone illegally covers their tracks...reports it lost/stolen. Or, it was legitimately stolen and the previous owner is innocent. If, as in smuggling, it occurred outside the US...do you think they'll investigate gun smuggling anymore than they do now? (It's very costly and targets big dealers, and requires a buttload of paperwork but it's already happening.)
 
Lursa said:
Doesnt work for stolen guns and for people who wont pass background checks and thus dont bother to buy from someone who will run one. And if the person wasnt prohibited at the time...no blame can be placed on the previously registered owner.

So...again, how does registration stop gun crimes?
Click to expand...

With registration, gun owners are required to inform the police when their guns are sold (to someone legally allowed to possess and who then registered the firearm in question) AND when the firearm is stolen. The responsibility is on the one to whom the firearm is registered at the time...and when illegally-possessed firearms are found at a crime scene, the ATF looks to see who the most recent registered owner was, and goes to him and says, "You were the most recent registered owner. You didn't report the sale or theft of this firearm as you are required to do by law. You are therefore legally responsible for what this criminal did with your firearm." Same thing that happens with cars, btw.

Do that, and all of a sudden unscrupulous owners will stop selling firearms to anyone who walks up to them with money.

But don't worry, this will never happen in your lifetime since this would cost the gun manufacturers tens of millions in annual revenue, and they (and their puppet the NRA) will happily politically crucify any Republican politician who would dare vote for registration...'cause those profits are FAR more important than doing anything about gun smuggling....
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Seeing as how full registration would make a huge dent in gun-smuggling (which would keep a lot of firearms out of the hands of those who can't pass a background check AND would greatly cut down on the quarter-million firearms that Americans smuggle into Mexico every year), absolutely.

All the fearmongering about "the government's a-gonna confiscate all yer guns if you register them" is just that: fearmongering.
Click to expand...

It wouldn;t make a lick of difference Glen.. you have already had it explained why.

Your gun registration goes away with a simple metal file.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
With registration, gun owners are required to inform the police when their guns are sold (to someone legally allowed to possess and who then registered the firearm in question) AND when the firearm is stolen. The responsibility is on the one to whom the firearm is registered at the time...and when illegally-possessed firearms are found at a crime scene, the ATF looks to see who the most recent registered owner was, and goes to him and says, "You were the most recent registered owner. You didn't report the sale or theft of this firearm as you are required to do by law. You are therefore legally responsible for what this criminal did with your firearm." Same thing that happens with cars, btw.

Do that, and all of a sudden unscrupulous owners will stop selling firearms to anyone who walks up to them with money.

But don't worry, this will never happen in your lifetime since this would cost the gun manufacturers tens of millions in annual revenue, and they (and their puppet the NRA) will happily politically crucify any Republican politician who would dare vote for registration...'cause those profits are FAR more important than doing anything about gun smuggling....
Click to expand...

Yeah.. that's not what happens with cars by the way.

Your whole theory is a pipe dream

Listen.. Canada has registration of handguns.. they have sever handgun registration.. you know what criminals use in Canada to commit crime with.. handguns.
 
jaeger19 said:
It wouldn;t make a lick of difference Glen.. you have already had it explained why.

Your gun registration goes away with a simple metal file.
Click to expand...

Just like automobile VIN numbers go away with a simple metal file?

Here's a clue - make something very difficult to do, and a lot fewer people will do it. If the firearm registration number is in places that are very difficult to get to, sure, there will still be some who will find a way to erase those numbers...BUT the great majority of criminals won't. Why? Because most criminals are lazy - that's why they decided to take up a life of crime in the first place.
 
Lursa said:
How does registration prevent gun-smuggling? Those guns wont be sold legally anyway.

The people you mentioned wont register, wont buy from commercial dealers, wont pass background checks...that market becomes even more appealing to them with registration.
Click to expand...

What if we had the death penalty for anyone committing crime with a firearm that was not registered? Do you think that might be effective towards solving the problem of people not registering? If you don't approve of the death penalty, substitute twenty years if it makes it easier for your consideration.
 
faithful_servant said:
At the heart of the 2nd Amendment is the idea that an armed People is the last line of defense against a gov't that has stopped being "For the People..." Anything that gives the gov't the ability to circumvent that should be fought against. While registration doesn't automatically lead to confiscation, it most certainly does make it vastly simpler. Our Founding Fathers saw the abuses of a government that no longer had its citizen's best interests at heart and made sure that if the new gov't they were forming crossed that line that "We the People" would have the ability to stop it.

Being Canadian, you are connected to the nation that was the oppressor at that time, so you don't get say anything about it... (accursed evil Canadian oppressors)
:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Those of you that are concerned about the prospect of registration leading to confiscation: can you tell us just how often guns are confiscated by government after mandatory registration?

I ask because I would like to quantify the risk here? Does it happen 5% of the time or 10% of the time of 27.4% of the time or 75% of the time?

We cannot really identify a significant problem until we quantify it to see if it just a tiny molehill or indeed a mountain looking on the horizon.
 
Lursa said:
How does that stop smuggling?

And how does knowing if a firearm went to and from someone legally or not prevent gun crime? Anyone that 'intentionally' provides a firearm to someone illegally covers their tracks...reports it lost/stolen. Or, it was legitimately stolen and the previous owner is innocent. If, as in smuggling, it occurred outside the US...do you think they'll investigate gun smuggling anymore than they do now? (It's very costly and targets big dealers, and requires a buttload of paperwork but it's already happening.)
Click to expand...

Yes, there would be SOME who would do just as you say...but there would be a lot more who would NOT. You can't say "we shouldn't have this law because people would break this law or just get around it" - that is NEVER a reason to not have a law. That's like saying "get rid of laws against bank robbers 'cause they'll just do it anyway."

There's an old saying: don't sacrifice the good in order to achieve the perfect. You will NEVER get a perfect law that stops all of a certain crime...but you CAN have a law that would decrease (to lesser or greater extents) that crime. Speed limits don't stop people from speeding...but it DOES get more people to slow down...especially after they or their friends get speeding tickets along the way.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Just like automobile VIN numbers go away with a simple metal file?

Here's a clue - make something very difficult to do, and a lot fewer people will do it. If the firearm registration number is in places that are very difficult to get to, sure, there will still be some who will find a way to erase those numbers...BUT the great majority of criminals won't. Why? Because most criminals are lazy - that's why they decided to take up a life of crime in the first place.
Click to expand...

Actually yes.. they just pop off the vin.. or get different vin numbers etc.... or do you claim that stolen cars don't happen in America? You don't think people are driving unregistered cars?

Sheesh.
 
haymarket said:
What if we had the death penalty for anyone committing crime with a firearm that was not registered? Do you think that might be effective towards solving the problem of people not registering? If you don't approve of the death penalty, substitute twenty years if it makes it easier for your consideration.
Click to expand...

Lets get this straight.. we have enhanced penalties for someone just USING a firearm in a crime registered or not. .. and it doesn;t deter criminals

we have a DEATH PENALTY in many states for killing someone.. and it doesn;t deter them..

Sheesh again.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Yes, there would be SOME who would do just as you say...but there would be a lot more who would NOT. You can't say "we shouldn't have this law because people would break this law or just get around it" - that is NEVER a reason to not have a law. That's like saying "get rid of laws against bank robbers 'cause they'll just do it anyway.".
Click to expand...

Yeah..no its NOT like saying that.

Its like saying.. hey..lets put up a sign that says "bank robbers are not allowed in banks".. and then expected them to obey that sign,.
 
jaeger19 said:
Lets get this straight.. we have enhanced penalties for someone just USING a firearm in a crime registered or not. .. and it doesn;t deter criminals
Click to expand...

I am suggesting upping the ante until criminals do care about it.

we have a DEATH PENALTY in many states for killing someone.. and it doesn;t deter them..
Click to expand...

Again - up the ante by having it in all states and make it swift and sure rather than the ten to fifteen years it now takes so that it means something instead of the rarity it now is.
 
OlNate said:
But being an accursed evil Canadian oppressor, you know I'm gonna ... ;) lolz

I think this may be at the heart of why a lot of folks outside don't get American gun culture. I have to be honest, I have tried really hard, and I am fairly certain I get the intellectual explanation behind it, but I still can't identify on an emotional level. The reality is that I've never felt the need to be armed against my government, nor against my fellow citizens. I've enjoyed shooting all my life, but I've never thought about doing so against another human being (I haven't been in the military either). I've never felt so scared of the place I live that I have felt the need to own a firearm to protect my part of it, despite being totally comfortable around guns. In a lot of ways I feel sorry for you guys that it's as embedded in your culture, though I don't judge you for it.
Click to expand...
And here I thought you actually wanted an honest conversation, and then you had to go with the old "fear" canard. People who carry aren't normally living in fear, though some have cause if they are threatened by someone, or for people dealing with stalkers, etc. It's a tool to help you defend yourself if you need it, and it's just common sense, like locking your house or car. Just because one chooses to be responsible for their own defense, that doesn't mean they're afraid or are planning to shoot someone.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Canada doesn't have (and AFAIK has never had) a huge problem with gun smuggling. America does.

Registration wouldn't stop gun smuggling, but it would significantly decrease gun smuggling. How? Because right now, when illegally-possessed firearms are confiscated after a crime, there's no real way to know how that firearm went from legal owner to illegal possessor. With registration, there is an identifiable chain of custody (just like with cars)...and so the ATF can walk up to Joe Schmuck and ask him, "Exactly how is it that your legally-owned firearm got into the hands of this criminal? You didn't inform us that you sold it or that it was stolen, and so that means that you are now being investigated for gun smuggling."

You see, with registration, you must inform the police when you sell or donate a firearm (but that can only be done if the new owner is legally allowed to own that firearm and that firearm is immediately registered in the new owner's name)...or if that firearm is either stolen or destroyed. What's more, just like with cars, the registered owner is held responsible for whatever is done with his firearms...which means that (just like with his car) he's got to keep it out of the hands of his kids, he's got to keep it safe, and he's got to report it if it's stolen.

Do all that, and gun smuggling will plummet...because then the smugglers are easily identified, prosecuted, and jailed.

But don't worry - this will not happen in our lifetimes since the gun manufacturers know full well that this would cost them tens of millions of dollars in annual revenue, and so they (and their puppet the NRA) would make damn sure that they would politically crucify any Republican who dared support such gun-control measures that work so well for most of the rest of the first-world democracies. After all, since when should we give a damn about the lives of the thousands of innocent men, women, and children that we lose every year to gun violence? The revenues and profits of the gun manufacturers are FAR more important, right? 'Murica!
Click to expand...

The United States doesn't have a gun smuggling problem.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
With registration, gun owners are required to inform the police when their guns are sold (to someone legally allowed to possess and who then registered the firearm in question) AND when the firearm is stolen. The responsibility is on the one to whom the firearm is registered at the time...and when illegally-possessed firearms are found at a crime scene, the ATF looks to see who the most recent registered owner was, and goes to him and says, "You were the most recent registered owner. You didn't report the sale or theft of this firearm as you are required to do by law. You are therefore legally responsible for what this criminal did with your firearm." Same thing that happens with cars, btw.

Do that, and all of a sudden unscrupulous owners will stop selling firearms to anyone who walks up to them with money.

But don't worry, this will never happen in your lifetime since this would cost the gun manufacturers tens of millions in annual revenue, and they (and their puppet the NRA) will happily politically crucify any Republican politician who would dare vote for registration...'cause those profits are FAR more important than doing anything about gun smuggling....
Click to expand...

People will just start stealing more guns. Crime rate increases.
 
haymarket said:
What if we had the death penalty for anyone committing crime with a firearm that was not registered? Do you think that might be effective towards solving the problem of people not registering? If you don't approve of the death penalty, substitute twenty years if it makes it easier for your consideration.
Click to expand...

It would be ruled unconstitutional for anyone not allowed to (own much less) register a gun in the first place (e.g. a convicted felon). Since there already are serious penalties for committing crimes while armed it would not much matter.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It would be ruled unconstitutional for anyone not allowed to (own much less) register a gun in the first place (e.g. a convicted felon). Since there already are serious penalties for committing crimes while armed it would not much matter.
Click to expand...

Why would it be unconstitutional?
 
TurtleDude said:
stupid analogy=why do you want to pass laws that only harass honest citizens. Owning a gun is not harmful unlike bank robbery.
Click to expand...
I have to wonder if people who think like Glen feel that gun owners are just potential criminals, just one minor incident away from being triggered into shooting up a mall.
 
haymarket said:
Why would it be unconstitutional?
Click to expand...

SCOTUS precedent:

The National Firearms Act of 1934 required the registration of certain types of firearms. Miles Edward Haynes was a convicted felon who was charged with failing to register a firearm under the Act. Haynes argued that, because he was a convicted felon and thus prohibited from owning a firearm, requiring him to register was essentially requiring him to make an open admission to the government that he was in violation of the law, which was thus a violation of his right not to incriminate himself.
Click to expand...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States
 
Moon said:
I have to wonder if people who think like Glen feel that gun owners are just potential criminals, just one minor incident away from being triggered into shooting up a mall.
Click to expand...

what bugs him is how they usually vote
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom