Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Article calling for gun registration

  1. #1
    New Member  
    Join Date
    01-16-08
    Location
    TX and NM
    Posts
    10

    Article calling for gun registration

    Writer Fred Lebrun of the Times Union thinks it would be a good idea to register all guns. After all, no ones blinks twice at registering all cars.

    An excerpt from his article:
    "The centerpiece has to be a national identification system for handguns. A computerized system that would be accessible to all law enforcement agencies, and that would standardize the requirements for handgun ownership coast to coast. I am not suggesting anything radical in the slightest."

    I wrote him to say that when he figures out how to make criminals register he might have a good idea, otherwise not. You can read the article at

    http://timesunion.com/AspStories/sto...storyID=738621

    and perhaps he would like to hear from others, too. Credit to Alphecca for first posting a link to the article.

  2. #2
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-24-02
    Location
    Melbourne, Florida
    Posts
    1,221
    I am not suggesting anything radical in the slightest.


    Yeah, right. The purpose would be ???
    < I don't need no teenage queen, I just want my em-fourteen....>

  3. #3
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    06-16-08
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    323
    Perhaps you could also suggest to him that the difference between guns and cars is that there isn't anything about cars in the Constitution (and I won't even start asking why we have to register cars - I guess he hasn't questioned it, but I sure have).

    National registration doesn't seem like something that would fly, though it's always best to be wary of attempts. Fortunately for us here, Florida has a prohibition on gun registration in the state Constitution. I'd think that the more states have that kind of rule the less likely a national registration would get through. So it's something to work toward in other states, but could be difficult politically because of people like Lebrun who somehow fail to see the problem with registration and think people who want to keep the government out of their business are just paranoid.
    "Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place." - Frederic Bastiat, The Law

  4. #4
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    05-29-08
    Posts
    1,486
    Here's what he got from me:

    Fred,



    I am writing in response to your article "Lock, load, and try taking aim at the illegal handguns." Reading the point you make between your profuse usage of terms like "illogical," "insane," "irrational," and "wacky," your article is misguided and dangerous. You invert the causal relationship between a human, a gun, and crime. You appear to state that the guns cause the problem and are the danger, not the criminals who will never stop obtaining them regardless of any law to the contrary.



    As far as your registration system, in every historical case of gun confiscation, registration has preceeded confiscation. Look at the United Kingdom or Austrailia. As Janet Reno so succinctly put it, "Registration is just a step." Simply because you cannot fathom confiscation ever happening - despite, as you yourself stated, us now facing the most liberal US government since 1935 (including the Supreme Court, with a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment means what it says it means hardly proving it "very conservative" but rather frighteningly the opposite) with an openly Marxist Executive at the helm who has made a career out of oppressing gun owners and their civil rights - doesn't mean it never will.



    Confiscation and the abridging of American liberty will be averted by thwarting every precedent, every scheme and every plot to inch closer to that goal. Assault weapons bans must be defeated. Handgun bans must be defeated. And, above all, registration must be defeated.


    You may call me paranoid, but you are mistaken if you believe that confiscation would be passively complied with by every American who has responsibly armed themself. Some of our blood still runs red, and some of us believe that no mandate by any federal agency or body invalidates the Constitution of the United States' guarantee that my "right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."



    Sincerely,

    (elChupacabra!)
    If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you. - Jack Handey

  5. #5
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-27-02
    Posts
    5,301
    We should treat firearms like cars. Once the basic requirements of "street legal" are met (with the numerous exceptions allowed), there are no restrictions on top speed, mileage, size of gas tank, etc. Sound suppressors (i.e. mufflers) are not only freely available but required.

    Add to the fact that you can begin using them in public at 16-18 (depending on locale) and there is no requirement for registration at all if you only operate them on private property, and we are good to go.

    If you explain to people what treating firearms like cars really entails, you'll quickly find them falling over themselves to explain why that was only a minimum, and they really want firearms treated far more strenuously than cars.

  6. #6
    New Member  
    Join Date
    07-12-07
    Posts
    1
    Woo, first post at THR.us, hi guys!

    My response to Mr. Lebrun:

    Mr. Lebrun,

    Your article on national registration of handguns smacks of "What, me worry?" In every country where there has been a national confiscation of firearms, it has been preceeded by a national registration of those firearms. The gun control lobby has always been about baby steps, first arbitrary bans on magazine capacity, then bans on private transfer of firearms (aka, "gun show loophole"), then registration of gun owners, then confiscation. Every step of the way, it's called "common sense," while denying the next step they plan to take.

    In your article, you state that there is no evidence that gun confiscation is anybody's agenda. If not gun confiscation, what do you imagine Sen. Dianne Feinstein meant in an interview with CBS when she said: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them -- Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in -- I would have done it." Perhaps she was only talking about so-called "assault weapons" in that interview, but after that what would she confiscate? "Spray and pray" semi-automatic pistols? "Armor-piercing" powerful revolvers? Maybe "baby-stabbing blood-thirsty" knives?

    Take care,
    (TheDom)

  7. #7
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-31-04
    Location
    Sarasota Fla / Huntersville N.C.
    Posts
    2,190
    At the next Constitutional Convention I'm proposing an Amendment that makes Cars and Driving a coostitutional right.
    "The right to drive shall not be infringed. Moreover individuals have the right to 500 cubic engines and 4000 pound cars with fins."

    Tell that to every highschool driving instructor!!

    AFS
    'Qui tacet consentit': To remain silent is to consent.

  8. #8
    Moderator  
    Join Date
    10-10-06
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, VA
    Posts
    7,807
    My reply emailed to Mr. LeBrun

    Mr. Lebrun,
    As a former upstate New Yorker, now expatriated to Virginia, I read your article “Lock, load and try taking aim at the illegal handguns” with some interest.

    In the end I was enormously disappointed by your lack of awareness regarding certain fundamental facts.

    You discuss “gun” control and “gun” terror but completely fail to grasp that the problem is not the device known commonly as a “gun”. A gun is an inanimate tool, incapable of ANY action of its own. The REAL issue therefore is -who- has a gun and how they -choose- to use it. In short “gun control” is a complete red herring because solving violence and crime problems isn’t about guns and it’s not about the law-abiding, it’s about CRIMINALS!

    A good person, competently trained with any firearm you can mention, presents no risk to anyone (possibly excepting a criminal in the commission of a crime). Someone of the criminal stripe does present a danger REGARDLESS of what tool they choose (guns, knives, clubs, bare fists, steel toed boots, group attacks).

    The common element, you see, is not the gun; it’s the CRIMINAL.

    Another fact is the definition of a criminal, that being someone with a willingness to ignore/break the law at their convenience.

    A national registration scheme will consume an enormous amount of time, money, and effort, and to what purpose? If it somehow came into effect you’d have a registration of the legal, the law abiding, the people about whom no-one is concerned and who haven’t done anything wrong…yet are now saddled with the dual burdens of obeying this scheme AND of paying for it. (being punished for behaving always plays well to the general public).

    Call me cynical but I doubt any criminals (see the definition above) are going to steal (or obtain by other nefarious methods) a gun and then turn around and say “oh yeah, gotta make sure and register this today”. No, somehow I suspect that the criminals will choose to "opt-out" of your tracing system. Thus the stated goal of tracing firearms for the purpose of law enforcement is instantly rendered null.

    In short your grand plan is doomed to failure because you have been aiming at the wrong target right from the start.

    Sincerely
    .
    "The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on"

  9. #9
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    06-30-08
    Location
    Blue River Wisconsin, in a little hut in the woods
    Posts
    3,530
    His target was guns and he knew exactly what he was doing when he called for registration.
    1934 – National Firearms Act, 1968 – The Gun Control Act, 1986 – Firearms Owners Protection Act, 1993 – Brady Handguns Violence Act, 1994 – Assault Weapons Ban, 1995 – Gun Free School Zones Act, NO MORE COMPROMISING

  10. #10
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    08-07-06
    Posts
    402
    Driving is a privilege. Firearms are a right.

    John

  11. #11
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    01-17-08
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri
    Posts
    153
    When I buy them and fill out that long A$$ firearms form, show my ID and they do the backgrould check, isin't that a sort of registration???

    I mean, I'm sure everyone of those files get entered into a database...
    If you can blame guns for Crimes, then I can blame my Keyboard for misspelled words!!!

  12. #12
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    03-30-08
    Location
    Deep South Texas
    Posts
    1,010
    Next, we'll register and regulate the news media. After all, they're constantly causing panics and confusion by putting out incorrect or slanted information.

    Background checks should be required to buy a newspaper. After all, if you are too impressionable or ignorant then you may misunderstand the message and then act incorrectly.

    Journalists must be held responsible for their products. If personal harm or a financial panic results from the published work of a journalist then the publisher and the reporter should be held responsible for the expenses plus appropriate penalties.

    The publishing of "leaked" information is another major problem that must be addressed. Sources must be registered and serial numbered so that they can be held responsible in cases where national security, criminal action, and slanderous statements are involved.

    Stealth publications, where regular news articles are converted and concealed on computers and the internet, should be carefully re-examined to ensure that no changes are made during the transition. Since there is no way to absolutely certify the accuracy of this "new media" then it may be necessary to ban it outright.

    Other regulations may prove necessary as the media continue to change in ways that our forefathers had not visualized when they created our Constitution.

    Remember, it's the responsible thing to do.
    "Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."
    -- Steven Wright

  13. #13
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    06-23-06
    Location
    Middle, TN
    Posts
    2,093
    Driving is a privilege. Firearms are a right.

    John
    only because the FF didn't realize the following generations would be so stupid as to NOT realize that travel (even driving) was a right! You didn't see them trying to limit travel or register horses, carraiges, buggies, etc.
    Not all problems can be solved by shooting the heck out of them..... Well most can, and if not then high explosives can really be your friend!

    If you can't do something smart ........ do something right!

    There are only 2 people in this world I trust and you ain't one of'em!

  14. #14
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-16-08
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    126
    Theotherwaldo:

    If you didn't send that in to Mr. Lebrun, please do so!!

    Loved it!

  15. #15
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    09-14-04
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    379
    This whole registering motor vehicles analogy is fraudulent.

    There's no law saying you have to register cars.

    You only need to register cars to get a permit for driving on public roads.

  16. #16
    Member  
    Join Date
    10-30-03
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    3,228
    My letter to Fred:

    Dear Fred,
    I will be the 10,000th person to point out the illogic of your article. With hundreds of thousands of guns already in circulation and not registered (as most states do not register guns), calling for registration will still leave huge numbers of unregistered guns around. And those unregistered guns will be in the hands of criminals, who do not obey laws.
    So your article calls for getting law abiding gun owners to do something that criminals will not do. Law abiding gun owners, like yourself, aren't the problem. Criminals are. So your proposal will do nothing to alleviate the problem you outline.

    I will agree with you that we need a national standard for gun purchases. I propose the standard of my own state, Tennessee. Here anyone who meets the Federal requirements can go into a gun shop, pass the Federal background check, and walk out with as many guns as he can afford. He can do so as often as he likes. I think that is a sensible standard and should replace the absurd and insane patchwork of state laws, like N.Y's.
    Additionally we need one standard for concealed carry. I propose the same standard currently in use for driver's licenses: whatever one state does is valid in every other state.
    btw, I came to your article via an international chat board. Here is the link:
    http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=401928
    Thanks,
    The Rabbi
    Nashville TN
    Class 01 FFL

  17. #17
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-31-08
    Location
    Miami Beach,Florida
    Posts
    12,834
    Lenin would be proud.
    Fred is the perfect "useful idiot".
    The worse thing is ,the fool doesn't even know it.
    He truly thinks he's advocating a sensible policy.
    We just can't reach these people.
    They simply refuse to realize criminal's don't play by the rules.

  18. #18
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    06-22-06
    Location
    Montmorency Co, MI
    Posts
    896
    Criminals do NOT have to register theirs-per SCOTUS-5 th Amendment exempts them.

  19. #19
    Administrator   
    Join Date
    11-19-03
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    13,086
    I would point out the other fallacy in the argument -we require licenses, training, eye exams, proficiency testing, registration, mandatory insurance, tons of government mandated safety devices, rigidly defined areas of use...

    And still misused cars kill FAR more people than misused firearms.

    So tell me again how your system will save lives...
    If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

    http://czforumsite.info/

  20. #20
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-24-07
    Location
    Southeast CT
    Posts
    331
    Article calling for gun registration

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Writer Fred Lebrun of the Times Union thinks it would be a good idea to register all guns. After all, no ones blinks twice at registering all cars.
    It would be a good idea for Fred Lubrun to be fired from his job.

  21. #21
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-24-07
    Location
    Southeast CT
    Posts
    331
    An excerpt from his article:
    " I am not suggesting anything radical in the slightest."
    All lies.

  22. #22
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    04-13-04
    Location
    Tampa Bay area
    Posts
    1,371
    Let's see if we treat firearms like automobiles then we have.
    State to state travel/carry.
    The registration lets us use all the roads in the lower 48 and if one wants to put ones car/gun on a boat the US Virgin Islands, Hawaii, and Guam.
    No real limit on modifications if used on private property. Full auto is the same as a high lift cam is it not?
    A learners permit would let teenagers do the same with an adult. After the learning period the teen would be on their own to drive/carry as stated above.
    It almost would be worth it if not for the confiscation thing that would come later.

  23. #23
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    12-24-02
    Posts
    545
    Cars are registered to facititate payment of property tax.

    I am not aware the car registration prevents car accidents or criminal misuse of cars.

  24. #24
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    04-11-07
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    816
    Doesn't FOPA'86 prohivits federal gun registration?

  25. #25
    New Member  
    Join Date
    01-16-08
    Location
    TX and NM
    Posts
    10
    It supposedly prevents the government from creating a list of gun owners from dealer records. As far as I know, that's the only prohibition.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •