How to register all Guns....

[67gt500]

Ok really bowing out after this... but I hafto address the stupidity that declares that because I support gun legislature that DOES NOT I repeat DOES NOT mean I am some how a traitor... and how dare you accuse me of such.... it's insulting... stupid... and immature. I have the right to disagree with you without being called a traitor... unpatriotic... or spewing bullsh... about how I'm going to be responsible for the loss of life later.

Now I'm beginning to take offense.. you've said I've called you unpatriotic and now a traitor... and I'VE SAID NONE OF THESE THINGS. And if any of the comments MADE you think that I was implying ANY OF THIS, it was not my intention. At all.

 

[yellowperil]

I think Doboji has a point about gun registration. One of the biggest obstacles to keeping guns out of the street and out of kids' hands is finding their source. I'm not familiar how guns are currently tracked, but requiring each gun to be uniquely identified with its owner would surely help, IMO. Couple things to consider:

1) No one's going to take your guns away and ban them. There are about 210 million guns in this country, last time I checked. It would be logistically impossible to enforce such a law.

2) The U.S. has 3 to 5 times the homicide rate of any Western nation. The lack of enforced gun control in this country contributes to that. I'm pretty sure (don't quote me on this) that it's a lot harder to kill people with your hands or with a knife than with a gun. People argue that Israel and a couple W. European countries have a wide availability of guns and have low homicide rates. So obviously guns aren't the only factor. When you add in a culture of high violence in the media, family, government, and neighborhoods, consider the illegal drug markets in this country, and consider that the U.S. has 2-3X the poverty rate of most industrialized Western nations, you will get high rates of homicide. Guns will exacerbate that condition.

3) Homicide rates with guns far exceed self-defense situations with guns.

So let's say you are a responsible gun owner. Kudos to you, but why would you be so opposed to gun registration. Clearly it is designed to get guns out of the wrong hands.

 

[b0mbrman]

So..what kind of guns do you guys own? I'm turning 21 in a little bit and am thinking about picking one up...

Um...don't think I'm some sort of random kid who doesn't know anything about them though and is gonna go running around shooting crap, because I have been in the army

 

[Doboji]

yes I'm still reading... this is such a good discussion I find it difficult to leave....

but like I said... we're living in a fantasy world... a military capable of defeating the US would do so by enormously distructive means... and they wouldn't invade us by land... they would do exactly what we did in Iraq..... bomb us into the stone age... and squeeeze us... they would destroy us economically... thats all that they would need to do....

-Max

 

[Doboji]

saying that I'm going to run away to canada.... and that people like me are losing the fight for us already... etc etc... these are insulting.... nuff said... gotta go get my car before they lock the garage for the night!

-Max

 

[67gt500]

So let's say you are a responsible gun owner. Kudos to you, but why would you be so opposed to gun registration. Clearly it is designed to get guns out of the wrong hands.

I don't want to pay any registration fees. A government database requires some sort of 'governmental oversight' (DMV) which requires either diverting funds from other things like education, or it requires a new sort of tax which would essentially be a fee for registering the weapon.

Secondly, if this group is going to be nearly as incapable or incompetent as the department of unqualified individuals I don't want to have anything to do with them. They now take 21 WORKING DAYS to process a car title.

 

[67gt500]

now that I think about it I see what you were getting at with privatizing a possible oversight database/group. That would be an ideal situation if any sort of national registration took hold... the last thing we would want is to have a new federal entity bollocks everything up.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Doboji

I work in South Dallas, TX USA, what ivory tower do you live in?

 

[HardcoreRobot]

Instead of blaming the instrument, why dont we blame person that uses it. The problem is not inherent within the gun, but rather lies in the fact that there are people out there who abuse them. I advocate stronger punishment for these people. Get them the hell off the streets. I guarantee you will a see more of an impact by lengthening sentences then you will by forcing people to register their guns.

 

[67gt500]

Mushroom,

Look at virginia's method.. any crime committed with a gun automatically carries a 5 year sentence... regardless. And it is working.

 

[damocles]

I'm not big on gun registration, but i do believe people should go through the equivalent to a drivers license to prove that they have the basic competencies to own a firearm

 

[Doboji]

<< I work in South Dallas, TX USA, what ivory tower do you live in? >>



Lets not even get started on my &quot;ivory tower&quot;... I'm born and raised in the crime capitol of the world.... Washington DC... and not the nice part... the rough part... South East... Anacostia... I went to Suitland High School... as anyone can tell you... it's gun city where I live.... but I still don't hear the constant gentle sounds of small arms fire when I go out...

-Max

 

[67gt500]

is it any coincidence that over 80% of D.Cers vote democratic?

Why is it so crime ridden?

 

[Doboji]

Crime does not = democrats

so lets get beyond that.... crime = poverty
poverty = democrats

and lets not get this confused somehow to mean democrat policies don't work leading to poverty. It's more like... democratic policies are seen as most helping the poor. Which is why DC historically votes democratic.

-Max

 

[67gt500]

if democratic policies are seen as most helping the poor, and dc has historically voted democratic.. yet dc remains one of the poorest areas in the country... haven't people caught on?

 

[Doboji]

There are a hell of a lot more factors in determining why a place is historically poor than the political party.

For example...

NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!!

-Max

 

[67gt500]

There are a hell of a lot more factors in determining why a place is historically poor than the political party.

Common knowledge that DC has been historically democratic.. both voting and in representation. For example the mayor.. *cough*.

Voting democratic elects democratic leaders who in turn issue democratic policies and agendas. It is rather apparent that the liberal democratic approach to government has failed the DC area, and a new approach should be used. An overwhelming amount of blacks would support some sort of voucher which would allow their child to leave a failing public school and enroll in a successful public school somewhere else.

But heaven forbid the word voucher appear anywhere. That's too conservative an idea to be taken seriously.

 

[Aihyah]

I don't see much good in tracing a gun used illegally, other then to return it to its rightful owner. Most guns being used illegally (ie: stolen from someone) are already reported stolen by their law abiding purchaser, and logged as such, stolen. There's always the rare case where someone knowingly gives their gun to someone willing to do harm with it, but I imagine those are rare.


well how about it as a incentive for legit gun owners to hold on to their guns instead of selling em to people that shouldn't have em paper trail is a good thing, it should be a crime for a gun owner to knowingly sell or give a gun to someone else. no background checks etc=bad. sure u could say there are already guns out there that criminals have or could get..but the point is to make an effort. Law enforcement is supposed to make criminals lives hard, not throw up their hands in the air because they can't catch everyone.

 

[67gt500]

well how about it as a incentive for legit gun owners to hold on to their guns instead of selling em to people that shouldn't have em paper trail is a good thing, it should be a crime for a gun owner to knowingly sell or give a gun to someone else. no background checks etc=bad. sure u could say there are already guns out there that criminals have or could get..but the point is to make an effort.

Do you propose that we eliminate or append to the 2nd ammendment?

 

[Amused]

<< lets get one thing clear.... freedom is not clear.

There are really 2 distinct forms of freedom... freedom to, and freedom from.

Freedom to allows us to do things that we want when we want and where we want.. so long as they don't infringe on the freedom of others.

Freedom from allows us to practice our freedom to without being infringed upon by others.

It is a very delicate balance, and it cannot be looked at as a black or white issue.

For example:

We have the freedom to drive our cars where we want. But we cannot travel as fast as we want because it is dangerous and potentially infringes on others right to life. Same thing with drinking and driving. The reason we cannot simply walk up to someone and take what we want is the freedom from. As we have the freedom from our belongings being stolen. >>



Yes, but the ABILTY to do so is not restricted. Our ABILITY to yell fire in a crowded theater is not taken away. We are only forbiden to do so by law. My owning a gun IN NO WAY infringes upon ANY of your rights.



<< Freedom of religion, yep, just can't practice it on public property you pay for >>


This is an issue because in many settings such as a classroom, an individual has the power to infringe on another persons religious freedom. For example as a Jew when my teacher in 5th grade began teaching about Jesus in class, I was very confused. As a 5th grader I did not understand what was happening... but when I raised my hand and said I didn't believe in jesus... I was snickered at, and the teacher kindly informed me that I must accept Jesus or I was going to go to hell. This type of behavior is unacceptable.

Now I know that what you're talking about is nothing to this extreme... but like the gun issue.. it's an issue of a slippery slope. we must be extra careful not to infringe on the rights of others.

As for the gun debate... it is this very freedom that is at the center of the discussion. The question is... do Guns infringe on freedom or do they grant freedom. Some people say the former, some the latter. Noone here is out to destroy the tradition of freedom in this country. Quite the contrary... the discussion is merely about how to best preserve it.

-Max[/i] >>



Again, the simple act of a law abiding person owning a firearm IN NO WAY infringes upon your liberties.

 

[Amused]

<<

<< has car registration stopped car theft or use of stolen cars in crimes? No. It's only purpose is the taxation of cars on a continuing basis with the registration used to take money from people with legal, registered cars.. >>



Registering your car also makes sure it adheres to all safety regulations which saves millions of lives every years, it allows for the reporting of aggressive driving... and the reporting of millions of automobile assisted crime every year. So obviously the only purpose is not to collect taxes....

-Max >>



You're claiming that auto registration has had an impact on auto theft? Care to prove that?

 

[Amused]

<<

<< Our right to bear arms is our guarantee that an invasion by a foreign body is not ever possible without the most dire consequences. >>



No the army, navy, air force, and marines are our guarantee. Maybe when the constitution was written it offered a viable defense.... but now... Arms provide different benefits.... the ability to protect ones home, recreation, and the ability to deter crime.

That doesnt mean that Arms are no longer valuable... I believe in gn ownership... I'm even considering buying one... but lets not fool ourselves. If the government were willing to go to the process of attempting to confiscate guns... don't you think that the NRA membership database would be enough?....


-Max >>



Flatly wrong. An armed populace has been a deterant to invaders many times before. Switzerland is the only country in Europe that has not been invaded numorous times since Napolion. It is also the only country in western Europe with an armed populace, and until two years ago, no registration for guns except fully auto weapons issued to militia members, and stored in their homes.

The Vietnam War demonstrated that a modern military power can be resisted by guerilla fighters bearing only small arms. This lesson has not been forgotten. In 1992, the United States declined to intervene in the conflict in Bosnia-Hercegovina after an aide to General Colin Powell, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, advised the Senate Armed Services Committee that the widespread ownership of arms in the former Yugoslav republic made even limited intervention &quot;perilous and deadly.&quot; The deterrent effect of an armed populace was emphasized by Canadian Major General Lewis Mackenzie, who led United Nations peace keeping troops in Sarajevo for five months. Despite the tremendous capabilities of the United States Armed Forces, he explained, the prevalence of arms ownership in the area caused him to believe that if American forces were to be sent to Bosnia, &quot;Americans would be killed.... You can't isolate it, make it nice and sanitary.&quot;

 

[Aihyah]

Do you propose that we eliminate or append to the 2nd ammendment?

?? we already restrict firearms to people that don't pass background checks. is that against the 2nd amendment? are u even reading the full amendment? It only gives well regulated militias the right to own arms if your gonna go down that road.

 

[67gt500]

?? we already restrict firearms to people that don't pass background checks. is that against the 2nd amendment? are u even reading the full amendment? It only gives well regulated militias the right to own arms if your gonna go down that road.

it was a yes or no question and you asked me a question instead. And giving the time period any documented historian will tell you that the ammendment pertained to civilians. At the time it was written we were a fully armed society.

I simply asked what you thought we should do with the ammendment. Clearly any infringement is in violation of it so what are your thoughts?

 

[Clinotus]

Props to Doboji's reality checks, and to 67gt500's &quot;Take away this citizens right to bear arms completely, and we will end up with a generation that has no ability and no know-how to function with weaponry.&quot;

Best argument presented so far.


my 2k!