Registration
Kevin, in this post noting that Australia confiscated 43,000 weapons from cleaning up its registry, states that:
Registration: Only Good for Confiscation
I will not register. Ever.
In comments, I asked Kevin if he’d ever filled out a yellow form 4473 (which if you’ve ever bought a gun from a dealer, you have). It’s the form you fill out and they base the background check on (make sure you enter your county of residence in the address line, your drivers license address is correct, and answer the first question yes and the rest no – can you tell I’ve filled these out a few times?). He said he had. Sorry Kevin, but you’re already registered.
While there supposedly is no gun owner registry, guns can still be traced from the gun up. Police can track a gun to the last purchaser by following the paper trail. If there is mandatory registration, the powers that be can figure out who the last purchaser of a gun was. You could say you sold it. I don’t know if you can track from person to gun. My FFL buddies tell me that if you buy three or more handguns in five days, your name is put on a list at the ATF.
Having said that, I don’t really oppose oppose registration but I do oppose it to the extent it leads to confiscation. All my guns were bought through dealers and I filled out the yellow form for each of them. If there was a push to actually maintain a registry, I’d probably oppose it because it is a set up for confiscation.
That said, if it ever comes to confiscation, my response would be Come and get them.
February 17th, 2005 at 10:09 am
The way the 4473 is supposed to work is that the retailer retains them. Then, if a trace is required, the BATF goes to the manufacturer, finds out which retailer it went to, and then goes to that retailer to pull the 4473 to find out who the (original) purchaser was. Not a quick system. However, when a retailer goes out of business, his 4473’s go to the BATF.
Now the BATF isn’t supposed to computerize this information. IIRC, they are specifically denied that ability, and have been slapped down for trying to. Also, when the Brady Background Check passed, the information gathered by that check (at least on the approvals) is not supposed to be retained – by law. Ashcroft caught a load of sh!t for enforcing that portion of the law.
And, of course, in most jurisdictions there are no regulations for private-party sales, so using 4473’s isn’t very useful for determining just who owns just what, but you are correct: If you’ve ever bought a gun “on paper” the .gov can very easily determine if you’ve ever been a gun owner.
February 17th, 2005 at 12:57 pm
Uncle,
Here’s a few questions for ya:
A: What legitimate purpose does registration serve?
B: How can registration not be an aid to confiscation?
C: How can you “unregister” when you realize the harmless registration you signed up for turns into confiscation?
D: assuming you see the potential for abuse (i.e. confiscation) & the lack of merit (i.e. it doesn’t serve any purpose other than prepping for confiscation) then why do you not oppose it?
February 17th, 2005 at 1:01 pm
A – A tracing ability is a valuable resource in solving crimes. Additionally, it’s original purpose was to ensure that the militia have arms. They made sure each man had a musket and ammo.
B – Never said it wasn’t
C – I won’t. I say come and take them.
D – See A.
February 17th, 2005 at 2:22 pm
How’s that go? Molon labe‘s I’m going to say is that they can’t confiscate what they don’t know you have…
Not that I’d have unregistered weapons, mind you; that would be against the law…
February 17th, 2005 at 4:27 pm
Uncle,
tracing ability is not dependent on registration. For example, if one o fmy guns gets swiped I report a description & a serial number to the cops. If they come up with a match then everything’s cool. They wouldn’t have to have the info before it was stolen. No different than a VCR really; you just keep the info in a safe place to use it if necessary. I don’t see any valid argument relating to crime that would justify registration.
as for guaranteeing the militia is armed that could be plausible IF congress was living up to its part (that well regulated thing)but that would require registration of one arm (currently the M16A4) not all in ones possession.
besides (I like saving the big ones for last) why should anyone be compelled to register any of their property w/ the government? A DVD player registry wouldn’t go over well; neither would a printer registry. Why is gun registration okay (or at least not something to be opposed except in certain instances)?
February 17th, 2005 at 4:35 pm
Tracing is dependent on having a form, though. IF a crime is committed by a gun you bought, they come to you and say where’s this gun? You respond that you sold it to Joe Bob. Etc. your proposal would only cover stolen guns.
About registering property, good point. However, i register my house, my car, and a few other things.