Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
On the news last night there was a man who said that he has never sold a gun without a back round check ever at a gun show...
.Really what is the problem with keeping track of guns sold, people still get their guns unless if they are on the list?
Because it is the first step needed to ban guns….we have seen this in Britain and Australia, and in various states like New York and California…they just want to know who has what guns…until they get the power to ban the guns they want banned….then they send out letters telling the owners they have a certain period of time to get rid of their legal, constitutionally protected property….
Speculation fallacy. Again. Which is already the basis of the OP anyway.
Cars have been registered for over a century, and y'all just looooooooove to compare them to firearms.
Clearly they're going to ban cars any day now.
Cars are not guaranteed to you in the BOR. You do not have the right to own a car. Driving is a privilege.
Y'all just love to compare them to firearms.
A car is nothing but private property so you do have the right to own one and you have the right to operate it on your own property it's the driving on public roads that is not a right
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
How do we regulate our militias without knowing who has guns and what guns they have?
Do you have a problem with us having a free state?
On the news last night there was a man who said that he has never sold a gun without a back round check ever at a gun show...
.Really what is the problem with keeping track of guns sold, people still get their guns unless if they are on the list?
Because it is the first step needed to ban guns….we have seen this in Britain and Australia, and in various states like New York and California…they just want to know who has what guns…until they get the power to ban the guns they want banned….then they send out letters telling the owners they have a certain period of time to get rid of their legal, constitutionally protected property….
Speculation fallacy. Again. Which is already the basis of the OP anyway.
Cars have been registered for over a century, and y'all just looooooooove to compare them to firearms.
Clearly they're going to ban cars any day now.
Cars are not guaranteed to you in the BOR. You do not have the right to own a car. Driving is a privilege.
Y'all just love to compare them to firearms.
A car is nothing but private property so you do have the right to own one and you have the right to operate it on your own property it's the driving on public roads that is not a right
Show me where it specifically states in the Constitution that are you guaranteed the right to own a car and I'll show you where it specifically states you are guaranteed the right to own a firearm.
Because it is the first step needed to ban guns….we have seen this in Britain and Australia, and in various states like New York and California…they just want to know who has what guns…until they get the power to ban the guns they want banned….then they send out letters telling the owners they have a certain period of time to get rid of their legal, constitutionally protected property….
Speculation fallacy. Again. Which is already the basis of the OP anyway.
Cars have been registered for over a century, and y'all just looooooooove to compare them to firearms.
Clearly they're going to ban cars any day now.
Cars are not guaranteed to you in the BOR. You do not have the right to own a car. Driving is a privilege.
Y'all just love to compare them to firearms.
A car is nothing but private property so you do have the right to own one and you have the right to operate it on your own property it's the driving on public roads that is not a right
Show me where it specifically states in the Constitution that are you guaranteed the right to own a car and I'll show you where it specifically states you are guaranteed the right to own a firearm.
a car is nothing but private property no different than a piece of land, a dwelling, or a refrigerator
i don't think i said 'all'except of course to get and keep guns out of the black market and the hands of criminals
No, it won;t keep all guns out of the hands of criminals, but it will help keep many guns out of the hands of criminals. That's all it is intended to do.
but there can be no doubt that a national gun registry would reduce the number of firearms available to criminals.
How would it reduce the number of guns available to criminals?
Has background checks and waiting periods reduced the availability for criminals to get guns?
This is a couple of years old (2013), but More than a million people failed background checks to buy guns during the past 14 years because of criminal records, drug use or mental health issues, according to FBI figures.
Criminal record top reason for U.S. gun-check rejection - CNN.com
Of those million people how many acquired a gun by other means?
Since background checks became law, has it reduced gun crime or the number of murders by guns?
i don't think i said 'all'No, it won;t keep all guns out of the hands of criminals, but it will help keep many guns out of the hands of criminals. That's all it is intended to do.
but there can be no doubt that a national gun registry would reduce the number of firearms available to criminals.
How would it reduce the number of guns available to criminals?
Has background checks and waiting periods reduced the availability for criminals to get guns?
This is a couple of years old (2013), but More than a million people failed background checks to buy guns during the past 14 years because of criminal records, drug use or mental health issues, according to FBI figures.
Criminal record top reason for U.S. gun-check rejection - CNN.com
Of those million people how many acquired a gun by other means?
Since background checks became law, has it reduced gun crime or the number of murders by guns?
Yes.
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
How do we regulate our militias without knowing who has guns and what guns they have?
Do you have a problem with us having a free state?
We've been over this countless times
in the vernacular of the time "well regulated" did not mean government controlled
Speculation fallacy. Again. Which is already the basis of the OP anyway.
Cars have been registered for over a century, and y'all just looooooooove to compare them to firearms.
Clearly they're going to ban cars any day now.
Cars are not guaranteed to you in the BOR. You do not have the right to own a car. Driving is a privilege.
Y'all just love to compare them to firearms.
A car is nothing but private property so you do have the right to own one and you have the right to operate it on your own property it's the driving on public roads that is not a right
Show me where it specifically states in the Constitution that are you guaranteed the right to own a car and I'll show you where it specifically states you are guaranteed the right to own a firearm.
a car is nothing but private property no different than a piece of land, a dwelling, or a refrigerator
None of the things you listed are guaranteed rights in the Constitution.
I've yet to see "the right to keep and bear land, vehicles, dwellings, or refrigerators shall not be infringed" in the Constitution.
You have no Constitutional right to land, a house, a vehicle or a refrigerator.
You do have a right to keep and bear arms in defense of yourself, your family and your country.
Why you choose to argue over this is beyond me and quite silly of you.
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
How do we regulate our militias without knowing who has guns and what guns they have?
Do you have a problem with us having a free state?
To have a well regulated militia we need to register all our guns, license the owners to make sure they are properly trained and equipped...if we are invaded, we would have to call them up to protect us
i don't think i said 'all'
but there can be no doubt that a national gun registry would reduce the number of firearms available to criminals.
How would it reduce the number of guns available to criminals?
Has background checks and waiting periods reduced the availability for criminals to get guns?
This is a couple of years old (2013), but More than a million people failed background checks to buy guns during the past 14 years because of criminal records, drug use or mental health issues, according to FBI figures.
Criminal record top reason for U.S. gun-check rejection - CNN.com
Of those million people how many acquired a gun by other means?
Since background checks became law, has it reduced gun crime or the number of murders by guns?
Yes.
Prove it.
And then answer the first question posed.
Cars are not guaranteed to you in the BOR. You do not have the right to own a car. Driving is a privilege.
Y'all just love to compare them to firearms.
A car is nothing but private property so you do have the right to own one and you have the right to operate it on your own property it's the driving on public roads that is not a right
Show me where it specifically states in the Constitution that are you guaranteed the right to own a car and I'll show you where it specifically states you are guaranteed the right to own a firearm.
a car is nothing but private property no different than a piece of land, a dwelling, or a refrigerator
None of the things you listed are guaranteed rights in the Constitution.
I've yet to see "the right to keep and bear land, vehicles, dwellings, or refrigerators shall not be infringed" in the Constitution.
You have no Constitutional right to land, a house, a vehicle or a refrigerator.
You do have a right to keep and bear arms in defense of yourself, your family and your country.
Why you choose to argue over this is beyond me and quite silly of you.
So you're telling me you have no right to own anything unless it is specifically listed in the constitution?
How would it reduce the number of guns available to criminals?
Has background checks and waiting periods reduced the availability for criminals to get guns?
This is a couple of years old (2013), but More than a million people failed background checks to buy guns during the past 14 years because of criminal records, drug use or mental health issues, according to FBI figures.
Criminal record top reason for U.S. gun-check rejection - CNN.com
Of those million people how many acquired a gun by other means?
Since background checks became law, has it reduced gun crime or the number of murders by guns?
Yes.
Prove it.
And then answer the first question posed.
Not my job to answer all your silly questions. If you have a point to make, make it and back it up.
A car is nothing but private property so you do have the right to own one and you have the right to operate it on your own property it's the driving on public roads that is not a right
Show me where it specifically states in the Constitution that are you guaranteed the right to own a car and I'll show you where it specifically states you are guaranteed the right to own a firearm.
a car is nothing but private property no different than a piece of land, a dwelling, or a refrigerator
None of the things you listed are guaranteed rights in the Constitution.
I've yet to see "the right to keep and bear land, vehicles, dwellings, or refrigerators shall not be infringed" in the Constitution.
You have no Constitutional right to land, a house, a vehicle or a refrigerator.
You do have a right to keep and bear arms in defense of yourself, your family and your country.
Why you choose to argue over this is beyond me and quite silly of you.
So you're telling me you have no right to own anything unless it is specifically listed in the constitution?
I'm saying you have no Constitutional right to own any of the things you mentioned. But you do have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
How do we regulate our militias without knowing who has guns and what guns they have?
Do you have a problem with us having a free state?
To have a well regulated militia we need to register all our guns, license the owners to make sure they are properly trained and equipped...if we are invaded, we would have to call them up to protect us
You tell me what you think well regulated means.
And when you say "we" would call them up just who do you mean
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
How do we regulate our militias without knowing who has guns and what guns they have?
Do you have a problem with us having a free state?
To have a well regulated militia we need to register all our guns, license the owners to make sure they are properly trained and equipped...if we are invaded, we would have to call them up to protect us
You tell me what you think well regulated means.
And when you say "we" would call them up just who do you mean
We the People....same ones who wrote the Constitution in the first place
Show me where it specifically states in the Constitution that are you guaranteed the right to own a car and I'll show you where it specifically states you are guaranteed the right to own a firearm.
a car is nothing but private property no different than a piece of land, a dwelling, or a refrigerator
None of the things you listed are guaranteed rights in the Constitution.
I've yet to see "the right to keep and bear land, vehicles, dwellings, or refrigerators shall not be infringed" in the Constitution.
You have no Constitutional right to land, a house, a vehicle or a refrigerator.
You do have a right to keep and bear arms in defense of yourself, your family and your country.
Why you choose to argue over this is beyond me and quite silly of you.
So you're telling me you have no right to own anything unless it is specifically listed in the constitution?
I'm saying you have no Constitutional right to own any of the things you mentioned. But you do have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Well if you want to pick nits it says keep and bear not own not purchase not manufacture etc
The second amendment says nothing about maintaining a militia only that a militia is necessaryThe second amendment supports a gun registry to maintain a "Well regulated militia"
It's up to the people to form and maintain a militia if the need arises not the government
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
How do we regulate our militias without knowing who has guns and what guns they have?
Do you have a problem with us having a free state?
To have a well regulated militia we need to register all our guns, license the owners to make sure they are properly trained and equipped...if we are invaded, we would have to call them up to protect us
You tell me what you think well regulated means.
And when you say "we" would call them up just who do you mean
We the People....same ones who wrote the Constitution in the first place
Sorry but people in CA cannot "call up" a militia from CT therefore they have no reason to know who in CT has guns
Militias were always regarded as local entities not country wide entities
Furthermore membership in a militia is not a requirement to keep and bear arms
Registering guns is just so you can later ban them when you get the political will...
No, it isn't. It's about collecting information so that one can use that information to subsequently take action against people who betray the trust placed in them when they chose to exercise their right to own a firearm.
And no, owners of black market guns are not going to register their guns. But by having stricter rules that allow for the easy tracking and verifying the flow of any given gun from lawful seller/owner to lawful owner/sell to, eventually, an unlawful owner tells us who is responsible for failing to exercise adequate control over their weapon.
The problem is not that lawful users obtain guns; it's that unlawful users do. The only way to find out what ostensibly lawful consumers are/have lapsed in their duty to make sure nobody "untoward" gets hold of their gun, is to require folks to document/attest to how and when they came by their gun and how and when they yielded/lost possession of it.
For example, if you buy a couple guns and register both of them, great. Enjoy your weapons. If one of them gets stolen and you don't report the theft, there comes about the first "building block" in a plausible argument that you (1) were negligent in exercising due care over securing your weapon, (2) conspired to allow your gun to be stolen. Now one theft is not really indicative of either, so the presumption of innocence still accrues to you. In time, you replace you stolen weapon and buy several others and register them. If they don't keep getting stolen, there's little cause to think you are routinely negligent or willfully part of a supply chain for getting legal guns into the hands of illegal users.
You are a silly person......registration is not needed to do anything you just suggested and in fact is not being used to stop criminals now........the gun traffickers that have been captured, that I have posted about....have all been captured by police using snitches and undercover buys..........not one was done by following a registered gun.
and losing a gun or having a gun stolen does not make you a criminal.....And if they catch multiple criminals who all say yeah...that guy gave me the gun....there was no need to register guns to find that out...is there.....and that is how all other crimes are solved...actual police work.....
the absolute only reason to register guns is to eventually ban them....as happened in Britain, Germany, Australia, California, New York......
.there is a history that shows what registration allows......and it always ends in confiscation.......
I'm not silly at all. A registry isn't ever going to stop criminals. All it's going to go is give law enforcement a place to look to identify where the process of maintaining security over one's firearm ownership/possession breaks down.
Pink:
Maybe that's because there's no efficient and effective way to "mine" the data about gun ownership to determine whether/if there are any patterns associated with one or a group of "somehow related" individuals' losing possession of guns they lawfully obtained.
Red:
Yes, that's true if one is limited to taking a reactive approach to identifying the nature of an illegal weapons trade supply chain. If one wants to take a proactive approach to finding out where to look before once legal weapons make their way to illegal users and then get used to commit a crime or kill another person, one must have a means for identifying logical places to look. A registry provides a useful tool for enabling a proactive approach to the problem.
Blue:
Slippery Slope.
What has happened in other places is no indication of what will happen in the U.S. Moreover, those places don't have our 2nd Amendment so it is no surprise that the outcome you identified was a possible outcome in those place.
Nobody wants to take away one's guns. Officials and everyone else has a vested interest in making sure where they are, in whose possession they are.
