Registration of guns...why we oppose it...

[billc]

On another thread the "hitler didn't ban guns," argument has come up and in some of the posts in other threads the notion that registering guns wouldn't be a bad thing also came up...this is why registering guns is a bad idea, if not now, then later...regardless of who does it...

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1791/did-hitler-ban-gun-ownership

Indeed, there was no need for the Nazis to pass a law like that,

because the earlier Weimar government had already passed gun registration laws.

When I asked Cramer about his research, he said,

"The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intended to disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use them against their enemies once they were in power." In other words, they didn't need to pass additional laws.

The Nazis did pass a weapons law in 1938, but that only added restrictions to the previous law, especially for Jews and other "non-citizens."

So, hitler didn't need to pass a general law about registering guns because another foolish government already had...he just made laws directing them at Jewish people owning guns...

So, there is historical precedent as to why registering guns with the government is a bad idea...in fact a deadly idea, and we also have gun registration in California and New York that also shows more recently how registration can/will lead to mandatory turn ins, or at a minimum force people to turn in the guns when they die...which is just confiscation on a slow schedule...

 

[arnisador]

So, hitler didn't need to pass a general law about registering guns because another foolish government already had...he just made laws directing them at Jewish people owning guns...

So, there is historical precedent as to why registering guns with the government is a bad idea...

Imaginary Hitler is why we have to keep having actual kids being shot in schools, then?

 

[billc]

"Imaginary hitler...?" I don't think I want to be you just about now...

You know that whole hitler thing actually happened...right?

 

[billc]

You know, I think the last week might have confirmed what we have said all along about confiscating guns won't stop the killing...Boston should teach some important lessons to the gun grabbers...

 

[arnisador]

"Imaginary hitler...?"

Google it.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/...s-rant-guns-needed-to-fight-imaginary-hitler/

“No one is taking away all the guns,” Stewart said. “But now I get it. Now I see what is happening. So this is what it is, their paranoid fear of a possible dystopic future prevents us from addressing our actual dystopic present. We can’t even begin to address 30,000 gun deaths that are actually in reality happening in this country every year because a few of us must remain vigilant against the rise of imaginary Hitler.”

 

[Dirty Dog]

Imaginary Hitler is why we have to keep having actual kids being shot in schools, then?

Actual kids are being shot in schools because criminals are not affected by the current or proposed gun restrictions.

 

[arnisador]

Yeah, I agree that proposed gun restrictions are not as effective as enacted ones.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Yeah, I agree that proposed gun restrictions are not as effective as enacted ones.

Apparently you missed the part where I mentioned enacted restrictions as well as proposed. Neither are effective because (sit down, this may shock you) criminals don't care about the law.

 

[arnisador]

Apparently you missed the part where I mentioned enacted restrictions as well as proposed. Neither are effective because (sit down, this may shock you) criminals don't care about the law.

People keep saying that, yet we keep outlawing certain acts as crimes. What's up with that?

 

[Dirty Dog]

People keep saying that, yet we keep outlawing certain acts as crimes. What's up with that?

And those crimes just keep on being committed, don't they? If you want to enact stricter penalties for gun crimes, then go right ahead. But the current round of media-fueled panic-driven foolishness does nothing but criminalize otherwise law abiding citizens and infringe upon their rights.
Stop letting criminals out of prison. Stop letting lunatics wander the streets. Provide severe punishments (including death) for violent crimes. I'm good with all of that.
But stop trying to make me a criminal for owning magazines that will hold more than 5 rounds.

 

[arnisador]

And those crimes just keep on being committed, don't they?

Laws don't affect crime rates? Really?

 

[Big Don]

Laws don't affect crime rates? Really?

Are you going to make murder MORE illegal?
How does that work?

 

[Dirty Dog]

Laws don't affect crime rates? Really?

No. I don't think they do, really. Have you ever known anybody who (not jokingly) ever said that the only reason they didn't shoot someone was because it's illegal?

 

[Drasken]

So it is illogical for us to oppose registration based on the desire to prevent a horrible possibility in the future, which has happened more than once in the not so distant past. But it is completely acceptable for you to want to pass laws that will make little, if any, positive difference based on the desire to prevent a horrible possibile occurrence in the future because of events that have happened in the past.

So if our argument is invalid, so is yours. Do I think that a government could use a registration in order to oppress our society? Yes, it is possible. I don't think that is the desired goal at the moment, but if it were they wouldn't just tell us their plan. Do I think that there is a possibility that we could possibly need our guns in the future to defend our homes and country from foreign threat? Not likely, but not impossible.
Do I think there will be more shootings? Unfortunately it is more likely. Yes.
But do I think the proposed laws will stop these shootings or do anything to slow them down? ...Hahaha... Oh... Serious question? Then my answer is no. It's a happy happy joy joy law that will do nothing. Just like the Patriot Act put laws in place to deal with Terrorism. Well they caught a few idiots that likely would have been caught anyway.
But the Patriot Act took away a lot of rights from the citizen. And we let them take our rights, because we wanted to feel safe.
Well two KIDS. Young men. Just brought an entire city to its knees for days. They shut down the city of Boston and did everything they could to find this last suspect.
Yeah, Patriot Act did a lot to stop that one.

The fact is that laws passed in fear, rather than logic, are not very well thought out. Not effective, and giving up the rights given to us by the people who fought and died to protect... to give to us. Well we should be ashamed of ourselves for even CONSIDERING the act of throwing these rights away out of fear.
I for one am not so quick to do so. Not without a VERY good reason and logical argument, proving BEFORE the law is passed that it will have positive impact. And these BS laws will not.

 

[Big Don]

Bad laws weaken necessary laws.

 

[Drasken]

I would like to also point out that I in no way mean any criticism toward Boston's LEO. I believe they did things properly. They prevented many more possible casualties and moved in a coordinated manner to find one person in a huge city. That isn't easy.
But my point was, and still is, that the Patriot Act did nothing to warn anyone or stop 2 young men from hurting over 100 people. Killing police officers, spreading terror and forcing the necissary act of shutting down the city to prevent a horrible situation from becoming worse.

I wanted to say this before anyone could try and twist anything I said around to take away from my original arguments.

 

[arnisador]

Are you going to make murder MORE illegal?

Isn't your (plural) point that we shouldn't bother criminalizing it in the first place?

 

[arnisador]

No. I don't think they do, really. Have you ever known anybody who (not jokingly) ever said that the only reason they didn't shoot someone was because it's illegal?

Stiffer sentences can deter crime. The Three Strikes laws certainly affected criminal behavior--though sometimes in one direction and sometimes in the other.

Yes, I once heard a criminal plead with another criminal not to use a knife because they'd get in ore trouble if caught than if they merely beat and robbed their victim. This is part of the origin story of Savate--striking with a closed fist was considered equivalent to using a weapon so they developed kicking and open-hand strikes to avoid long sentences for brawling. (As with any martial arts creation myth, who knows how true it is.)

 

[Bob Hubbard]

1- its none of the governments business how many guns, knives, gold bars or dildos I own.

2- When they did require registration of at least 1 of those, confiscation followed.

So, no, no guns owned by me will ever be registered, if I were to own guns, which I may or may not.