Why don't we have an electronic gun registry?

[RavnFreek]

Which helps the police identify the criminal......how?

Police find gun at crime scene.

Police use "the registry" to find out the gun was stolen.

Now what?

Does the registry tell them who stole it?

No not really, but there is value to law enforcement to have that data.

[Wild Eyed Southern Boy]

Sounds like a paranoid delusion

Really? Go back to 1994. A democratic Anti-gun president, a democratic Senate & house. And the resulting assault weapon ban. Of course the mid term elections were greatly affected by that little piece of legislation. In the emotion of that time I can easily see a a total ban being attempted.
Well you say, simply vote it away. It's not that simple. You know as we'll as I do that once enacted its virtually impossible to rescind.

It's only paranoid delusion if you disagree with it.

(I hate using an iPhone keypad. It self corrected anti-gun to Antiguan)

[SemiAuto]

The NRA is just another in a long line of corporate entities that have gathered inordinate political power due to ball-less and spine-less legislators kissing their corporate asses.

Thus is the modern America.

Love it or leave it...

Or there is a civil right involved.

[SemiAuto]

Why don't we have an electronic gun registry?

The same reason we don't carry our papers around to be inspected by government bureaucrats on demand.

It is called freedom. Liberals should believe in it.

[pickles]

Really? Go back to 1994. A democratic Anti-gun president, a democratic Senate & house. And the resulting assault weapon ban. Of course the mid term elections were greatly affected by that little piece of legislation. In the emotion of that time I can easily see a a total ban being attempted.
Well you say, simply vote it away. It's not that simple. You know as we'll as I do that once enacted its virtually impossible to rescind.

It's only paranoid delusion if you disagree with it.

(I hate using an iPhone keypad. It self corrected anti-gun to Antiguan)

And how does having an electronic gun registry increase the liklihood of this happening?

[pickles]

Why don't we have an electronic gun registry?

The same reason we don't carry our papers around to be inspected by government bureaucrats on demand.

It is called freedom. Liberals should believe in it.

Isn't that exactly what those liberals in Arizona passed into law?

[Jeebus]

Thousands of guns go missing from licensed gun dealers every year. Some are not reported as stolen and end up being used by criminals.

How do they know if they're not being tracked already?

(PS - as a former FFL-01 licensee, I know the answer already, it's a rhetorical question. Every FFL-01 dealer has what's known as a "bound book" and must turn it in to BATFE when they cease operation. It tracks every regulated firearm you bring in, and every one that goes out. If not, you're in big trouble.)

Do you think gun dealers would "lose track of" as many guns if law enforcement had a better system of tracking firearms?

What makes you think that dealers do not have to keep track of them today?

Have you ever heard of the ATF's FFL-01 requirement of "Acquisitions & Dispositions" which is already mandatory for each and every licensee?

Maybe it would help keep some of the corrupt dealers honest.

Again, I ask you "how?" -- as it is already a requirement to keep a Acquisition & Disposition record of every regulated firearm.

[SemiAuto]

Isn't that exactly what those liberals in Arizona passed into law?

I wouldn't call them liberal. Not in the classical sense.

[soulflower]

Why don't we have an electronic gun registry?

The same reason we don't carry our papers around to be inspected by government bureaucrats on demand.

It is called freedom. Liberals should believe in it.

How often do you drive without your license and registration?

Do you disagree with police officers being able to run your tags electronically?

If not, then why shouldn't law enforcement have the same tools for firearms records?

[pickles]

I wouldn't call them liberal. Not in the classical sense.

Umm, I was being sarcastic. They're the far right wing of the GOP. So, no, I don't think it's accurate to call them liberal.

[SemiAuto]

How often do you drive without your license and registration?

I don't. Please point out where this is given explicit civil rights protection.

That said, there is opposition to the federalization of drivers licenses.

Do you disagree with police officers being able to run your tags electronically?

No, but they should have probable cause or a reasonable suspicion.

If not, then why shouldn't law enforcement have the same tools for firearms records?

An explicit civil right.

[Gopher]

Another progressive wet dream. The more common term for this sort of thing is gun registration. It’s also the prelude to confiscation. They always start with lots of assurances that the intent of the law is not to ban any weapons, etc., etc. Then, once the law is passed, slowly and deliberately over time they increase the restrictions and systematically ban entire classes of weapons even though they lied and gave assurances that none of that would ever happen. Now that they know who has the targeted firearms, they send the registered owners a letter informing them they have the option of rendering them inoperable, turning them in to the authorities or facing prosecution under the law and threaten surprise visits from the police to determine if the registered owners are in compliance. If you are looking for an example of how this works then look no farther than New York City. They are the model for this type of behavior.

If you are interested in seeing how one of these things works on a national scale, look north to Canada. They are in the process of dismantling theirs because it cost vastly more than they were told it would, it didn’t prevent crime like the supporters claimed it would and it didn’t help law enforcement solve any crimes which was the centerpiece of the legislation that created it. All it accomplished was to create a resource-sucking bloated government bureaucracy that accomplished nothing except to exert control over and harass people who were otherwise law-abiding citizens.

Fortunately, several Supreme Court decisions over the last decade and the prohibition by statute at the federal level against spending any money to establish one of these things is going to be a significant hurdle for the progressives to overcome.

I have a couple of questions for those who support this. Who is the law aimed at? Can a prohibited person be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm? If you need help, see Haynes v. United States.

[SemiAuto]

Why don't we have an electronic speech registry?
If your answer is the 1st Amendment then give yourself a gold star.

[NOTAGUNNUT]

Holy Crap!!!!! I agree with you on something

As long as the focus is on guns no progress will be made, and the tragedies will go on happening.

We've reduced drunk driving deaths by focusing our efforts on drunk drivers, and not on cars.

The same approach will work with gun crime, but too many just do not want to listen to that.

Laws effect the law abiding. They need to effect criminals, but there is too much profit in high crime rates for politicians, and lawyers to change anything substantially.

[soulflower]

I don't. Please point out where this is given explicit civil rights protection.

You need an explanation for why the Founders didn't mention automobiles? You don't think you have a Right to own a car?

No, but they should have probable cause or a reasonable suspicion.

The same rule should apply to electronic firearm records

[soulflower]

Another progressive wet dream. The more common term for this sort of thing is gun registration. It’s also the prelude to confiscation.

There's no rational grounds for your paranoia

[Grindelwald]

As long as the focus is on guns no progress will be made.

We've reduced drunk driving deaths by focusing our efforts on drunk drivers, and not on cars.

The same approach will work with gun crime, but too many jusr do not want to listen to that.

Using that approach we can say that to reduce gun violence our focus should be on guns. But comparing guns to drunk driving is asinine.

[soulflower]

As long as the focus is on guns no progress will be made.

We've reduced drunk driving deaths by focusing our efforts on drunk drivers, and not on cars.

The same approach will work with gun crime, but too many jusr do not want to listen to that.

Surprisingly I agree.

[NOTAGUNNUT]

Surprisingly I agree.

I edited that post while you were agreeing.

See if you still agree.

[soulflower]

Laws effect the law abiding. They need to effect criminals, but there is too much profit in high crime rates for politicians, and lawyers to change anything substantially.

Examples?

I mean Mayors brag about reducing crime all the time. I have yet to see any mayors bragging about crime going up or rewarded for crime increasing in their cities.

We can't make criminals stop committing crimes but we can control the flow of guns to criminals