- Thread starter
- #101
So you agree that registration of guns/cars does, in fact, NOT prevent their theft, as you claimed.No. I own a gun and I think it should be registered. Fro my own safety, and the safety of the general public. If my gun was stolen, I would like to recover it if possible. If the gun was registered, I could then prove my ownership.False premise - registration prevents nothing of the sort.I think guns should be registered for the same reasons I think cars should be registered. To prevent the unauthorized sale of stolen guns or cars.
But.. if you believe that guns should be treated like cars, then you belive than the only guns that need to be registered are those used on public property.
Then you disagree with the premise that guns should be treated like cars as all of the restrictions regarding cars are related to use on public property.But I do not agree with the premise you propose. Private property vs. public property.
If so, I am sure that YOU will be sure to mention this whenever someone brings it up.
But it IS the defining issue regarding the registering of cars and the licensing of drivers.The use and operation of my gun on private or public property is not a defining issue.
As I said, and as you seem to want to avoid admitting, is that you do NOT agree with the premise that we should treat guns the same as we treat cars.
Simply admit that you disagree with the premise, make a note to make a similar disagreement whenever someone brings up the idea, and move on.
Last edited: