What is the NRA up to these days?

[Stacyhs]

I guess the question becomes: What do you want the registry to do. (Which of course affects the question: What do you want the registry to be.)

Do you want to handle all potential situations (such as: situations where guns are stolen from a home but not used in a crime, or something that can warn cops if a domestic dispute they are responding to might have firearms present? ) Or do you want to just concentrate on "street crime"?

If your only goal is something to handle your regular corner store robbery, then a smaller gun registry (only dealing with new gun sales) would be appropriate. If you want something more comprehensive, then you need to figure out how to handle older guns that have been sitting in someone's closet for year. Then, once you figure out what type of registry you want (comprehensive vs. new gun only), you have to figure out how much value it will provide (and how much money is worth investing in it.) How will it help solve crimes/prevent gun violence, and are there alternative ways to spend the money that will be more effective.

Someone posted a reference to the Canadian gun registry earlier, which turned out to be a big failure.. Canada has been registering handguns for decades, but at one point the government decided to also register rifles/shotguns (including older ones). It was originally supposed to cost ~$2 million to set up, but by the end it had cost over $1 billion. And it STILL wasn't comprehensive (since many people either didn't register their guns, or tried but the government messed up the paperwork).

Even if those guns didn't work, or were old enough to be considered antiques, there are plenty of guns that are slightlyl newer (decades instead of centuries) that would still be functional and even used on a regular basis.

I can't give you a detailed answer to a question like yours because, frankly, I don't know enough about gun registries, etc. I know the limit of my knowledge and don't want to just pull things out of my arse. I can only say that guns need to be registered regardless of who sells/trades/buys them, whether new or resold, as long as they are usable.

 

[Lurch]

I'll just toss out a question. If cars, of order as numerous as guns, are all registered, then why not so for a device specifically designed to kill?

 

[Stacyhs]

I'll just toss out a question. If cars, of order as numerous as guns, are all registered, then why not so for a device specifically designed to kill?

 

[ServiceSoon]

Three rats, including Ted Nugent, jump ship from the NRA Board of Directors.

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1424393599840444417

I take your statement as affirmation that the NRA will be a better functioning entity after these three rats jumped ship. Here here!!

I'll just toss out a question. If cars, of order as numerous as guns, are all registered, then why not so for a device specifically designed to kill?

Your analogy is a failure because all the cars are not registered as you have claimed.

There were 210 million vehicles registered in the United States in 1996. Any idea how many were estimated to be unregistered in the State of California around that year? According to this resource, 5-15%.

Setting your failed analogy aside, I provided a link about 10 or 15 post above containing some information about actual examples of national gun registration schemes from various countries that all failed to meet their proposed objectives.

Unfortunately, they were wrapped in a blanket and hidden in a back bedroom after my dad died. We discovered they had been stolen several years later after we cleaned out the house after my mom died. We had wondered why my mom's handyman, who had painted that room, suddenly disappeared without a trace even though he'd worked for her for at least 3-4 years. Since Mom lived alone and no one else ever went upstairs without me or my sister with them (and that was exceedingly rare), there was no one else who could have taken them.

I don't worry about registering guns as I don't allow any in my house. Now, my gun nut BIL? I think he's got between 30 and 40 and he's not even a hunter. They just make him feel like a big man.

I hope that you reported this theft to the police.

 

[Segnosaur]

I guess the question becomes: What do you want the registry to do. (Which of course affects the question: What do you want the registry to be.)

Do you want to handle all potential situations (such as: situations where guns are stolen from a home but not used in a crime, or something that can warn cops if a domestic dispute they are responding to might have firearms present? ) Or do you want to just concentrate on "street crime"?

I can't give you a detailed answer to a question like yours because, frankly, I don't know enough about gun registries, etc. I know the limit of my knowledge and don't want to just pull things out of my arse. I can only say that guns need to be registered regardless of who sells/trades/buys them, whether new or resold, as long as they are usable.

So what you're saying is that even those 100-year old rifles that you said were stuck in some closet somewhere in your family home will need to be registered.

Canada's long-gun registry was costing over $1 billion (and I suspect we probably have fewer firearms per-capita, and a population that is less... rebellious.) Given the differences in population, firearms per capita, etc., the american system would probably cost over $10 billion. Would that be a good use of taxpayer money? (Compared to, for example, putting the money into other crime prevention strategies, such as drug and mental health treatment programs, monitoring of radical far-right groups, etc.)

 

[mgidm86]

forget it

 

[Segnosaur]

I'll just toss out a question. If cars, of order as numerous as guns, are all registered, then why not so for a device specifically designed to kill?

I think the difference is that many/most cars get a significant amount of weekly use. They interact with other vehicles and pedestrians on a regular basis. So its necessary that they be in good working order, that they can be identified, etc. Compare that to firearms, where many will sit unused for years/decades on end, and when they are used, they will only be used in a restricted environment (such as in the woods when hunting, a shooting range).

Plus, what would be the value in registering a firearm? If a car runs over someone, witnesses can look at the license plate, which can be used to track down the owner. If someone shoots someone, they usually don't leave their gun lying around after (and its not like they would have their gun license taped to the side of their firearm for any witnesses to read). There may be rare cases where registration might be useful (such as tracing stolen firearms to the owner), but I doubt those will be that common.

Please note that I am not against all firearms laws. Personally I think Canada has a good balance... we don't register all individual firearms (which was rather expensive when we tried it, and may have limited value). But, all individuals who obtain a gun must acquire a firearms acquisition certificate and pass a gun safety course. Handguns are registered, and certain other types are restricted (e.g. no fully-automatics). We also have rules regarding the storage of firearms and increased penalties for the use of firearms during crimes.

 

[Stacyhs]

I take your statement as affirmation that the NRA will be a better functioning entity after these three rats jumped ship. Here here!!

Your analogy is a failure because all the cars are not registered as you have claimed.

There were 210 million vehicles registered in the United States in 1996. Any idea how many were estimated to be unregistered in the State of California around that year? According to this resource, 5-15%.

Setting your failed analogy aside, I provided a link about 10 or 15 post above containing some information about actual examples of national gun registration schemes from various countries that all failed to meet their proposed objectives.

I hope that you reported this theft to the police.

Nope. Didn't realize if for a few years as we didn't know they were gone and we had no info on them. We didn't even know what type of rifles they were. They'd always just been there and my dad, who knew, had died several years before.

Just because some people break the law and fail to register or renew their registrations is no excuse to then not have any vehicle registration. Your claim that his analogy is a failure is, it itself, a failure.

 

[Stacyhs]

So what you're saying is that even those 100-year old rifles that you said were stuck in some closet somewhere in your family home will need to be registered.
Canada's long-gun registry was costing over $1 billion (and I suspect we probably have fewer firearms per-capita, and a population that is less... rebellious.) Given the differences in population, firearms per capita, etc., the american system would probably cost over $10 billion. Would that be a good use of taxpayer money? (Compared to, for example, putting the money into other crime prevention strategies, such as drug and mental health treatment programs, monitoring of radical far-right groups, etc.)

Yep. If a gun is usable, then it should be registered. Those rifles may have been registered many years ago for all I know.

I really don't give a flying F what Canada's registry cost. That's their problem. That's not the point. The point is there needs to be a record of every usable gun...or as many as possible... in the country. You're presenting it as an "either/or" situation which it isn't. We don't have to chose between registering vehicles and registering voters so why you think we have to choose between registering guns and "other crime prevention strategies, such as drug and mental health treatment programs, monitoring of radical far-right groups, etc. " is illogical.

 

[Kestrel]

I'll just toss out a question. If cars, of order as numerous as guns, are all registered, then why not so for a device specifically designed to kill?

Registering guns would not be hard. First step is to require a background check for most transfers of ownership. Then convert the application for a background check into an online form or app and save the data.

Finding the legal owner an an automobile is easy. Doing so for a firearm currently requires sending agents to search paper records at gun shops.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Registering guns would not be hard. First step is to require a background check for most transfers of ownership. Then convert the application for a background check into an online form or app and save the data.

Finding the legal owner an an automobile is easy. Doing so for a firearm currently requires sending agents to search paper records at gun shops.

But that would involve some kind of illegal computerizing of these records! That is downright unamerican.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'll just toss out a question. If cars, of order as numerous as guns, are all registered, then why not so for a device specifically designed to kill?

Cars are not all registered.

You need a car registration to legally drive on public roads, but you do not need one to own a car. And people do just let the registration lapse for various reasons, often legally. If you're not planning on driving a car for an extended period, you may let it lapse. If the car is junked, you may let it lapse. If the car is stolen, you may let it lapse. The government has no record of why a registration lapses.

A similar registration system would not work for guns. There is no equivalent for guns of driving a car on a public street. Requiring registration for all guns no matter what you do with them would be far more controlling than the registration system for cars. And it also runs up against the problem of how to track guns that are lost or stolen, or "lost" or "stolen", as well as how to enforce the registration requirement in the first place. Car registration requirements are easy to enforce because cars are rather easy to inspect when they are driven on public roads. There is no equivalent way to enforce gun registration requirements. And we haven't even touched on the fact that gun ownership is a constitutional right, whereas car ownership, let alone driving on public roads, is not.

Registering guns would not be hard.

It's easy to do if everyone complies.

It's impossible to do if they don't.

 

[Kestrel]

Cars are not all registered.

You need a car registration to legally drive on public roads, but you do not need one to own a car. And people do just let the registration lapse for various reasons, often legally. If you're not planning on driving a car for an extended period, you may let it lapse. If the car is junked, you may let it lapse. If the car is stolen, you may let it lapse. The government has no record of why a registration lapses.

A similar registration system would not work for guns. There is no equivalent for guns of driving a car on a public street. Requiring registration for all guns no matter what you do with them would be far more controlling than the registration system for cars. And it also runs up against the problem of how to track guns that are lost or stolen, or "lost" or "stolen", as well as how to enforce the registration requirement in the first place. Car registration requirements are easy to enforce because cars are rather easy to inspect when they are driven on public roads. There is no equivalent way to enforce gun registration requirements. And we haven't even touched on the fact that gun ownership is a constitutional right, whereas car ownership, let alone driving on public roads, is not.



It's easy to do if everyone complies.

It's impossible to do if they don't.

Why would you assume that a registration system has to be perfect to have any value?

ETA: Joe Bob buys a new Glock from his local gun shop. Later when Joe is short of cash he pawns the gun. A few years later the Glock is found at a murder scene. Under the current system investigators could trace the gun to Joe Bob via the gun store. If they can’t find Joe Bob the trail ends. But under a computerized system a sale from the pawn shop will show up.

 

[Ziggurat]

Why would you assume that a registration system has to be perfect to have any value?

I didn't.

But it's far more dependent on voluntary compliance than car registration is, it's still of limited utility, it runs into constitutionality questions, and there is very strong and quite frankly understandable opposition to it.

 

[ServiceSoon]

I didn't.

But it's far more dependent on voluntary compliance than car registration is, it's still of limited utility, it runs into constitutionality questions, and there is very strong and quite frankly understandable opposition to it.

There is also the learned experience of independent nations which indicates registering individual firearms is not worth the expense.

 

[plague311]

The laws in the US will never change with regards to guns. Ever.

It's been said ad nauseum. If the slaughter of children was shrugged off by lawmakers then it's over. Nail in the coffin. The only thing that will ever happen is for gun laws to become more lax in the future. Any conversation about any change is a non-starter from the word "go".

 

[shemp]

The U.S. is well on its way to becoming another failed state and ******** country. Gun laws are a part of that.

 

[Upchurch]

If the slaughter of children was shrugged off by lawmakers then it's over.

I am in no way suggesting that anyone try this, but I wonder if the slaughter of lawmakers would be similarly shrugged off.

Although, I suppose an attack on the Capitol building was largely shrugged off by half-ish of the Congress.

 

[Ziggurat]

I am in no way suggesting that anyone try this, but I wonder if the slaughter of lawmakers would be similarly shrugged off.

Although, I suppose an attack on the Capitol building was largely shrugged off by half-ish of the Congress.

Since we're talking about guns, it's odd that you use a case where no guns were used (except by police) and no lawmakers injured, rather than one where guns were used, with actual intent to kill lawmakers and multiple injuries.

Or perhaps it's not odd. Perhaps there's a reason to brush that one under the rug.

 

[Stacyhs]

There is also the learned experience of independent nations which indicates registering individual firearms is not worth the expense.

Citation needed.