As I said this would take fine tuning, but this is the idea. We have x number of weapons like vehicles. They all have a number even weapon's. The manufacture fires one bullet from each and does a ballistic, then files it. The weapon is shipped to a dealer and this weapon is again fired and ballistics done. It shows a track from A to Z. The new owner gets a regtration just like a car. So in the end if a body showes up with a bullet, police have a good starting point. Should the weapon be sold or a barrel change then it has to be recorded. So should after a lot of fine tuning could this work? It would provide jobs to input data, research, and yes upset many gun owners but it would also reduce some bad headaches. The police do a great job but it would help them as well. Now does a private frim take it on or should th gove get into the act? Your thoughts good, bad or indifrent.
2007-10-02 06:22:45 · 6 answers · asked by Yogi 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The point of firearms freedom is for The People to maintain an important check and balance against government, should government ever turn tyrannical. Basically, The People need the ability to overthrow the government in such a rare case.
If you craft firearm legislation around identifying and tracking guns and ammunition, you basically give government all the tools it needs to ban and confiscate weapons.
This happened in Germany back in the 1930's, by the way. There are 10,000,000 less civilians because of this disatrous legislation.
Remember, gun control is more about "control" than it is about "guns". All sorts of "controlling" legislation is being proposed on everything from healtcare, the child-rearing, to firearms ownership. The national government is trying to acquire more control and authority and diminish the individual at the same time.
Keep your freedom. Men died so you could be free.
2007-10-02 06:34:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Ok fine. Then every woman that wants to have an abortion needs to have her finger prints taken, a ten day waiting period must take place, a file maintained, and her name be published in the paper.
If you say they have a right to privacy, well there is no right in the constitution it is only provided by Roe v. Wade. BUT due to the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment everyone has the right to privacy.
Also something else to ponder, the FBI looses thousands of computers a year. My state just had a state agency misuse the citizenry's personal information.
The way liberals complain about the NSA phone captures of terrorists calling into this nation, they should be up in arms with American citizens rights being infringed upon. For instance to own a class three weapon a person goes through a background check that makes the NSA program look like getting asked for id at a bar.
2007-10-03 17:55:26 · answer #2 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Same as any gun control, useless. For one thing, say you own the same gun for 10 years and shoot with it once a month. Those ballistic markings are going to change. Further, firearms are sold privately, and given away every day of the week. The paper work nightmare for such a system can only be imagined. And the reason why gun owners are against gun registering and not against registering their cars. Has anyone said it would be a good idea to take away every body's cars. Or even cars that have no legitimate purpose like Corvette's.
2007-10-03 17:01:33 · answer #3 · answered by jjbetz@swbell.net 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bad and expensive. There are already plenty of laws on gun control, and if you add them all up they are stricter than car ownership (which kills many more people than guns). Even if it was left to a private firm, the government would still be responsible for the bill and would gum up the works with crazy bureaucracy. Every time there's a new great law, it means a huge new department which drains tax money. It wouldn't decrease any headaches for anyone, since most guns used in crimes are purchased illegally anyway.
2007-10-02 06:33:29 · answer #4 · answered by smartsassysabrina 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I am a collector and general firearms enthusiast. In washington state, gun registration is not mandatory. If I want to purchase a firearm and not have it registered to me, I can simply purchase one in a "private party" transaction. If I buy from a dealer, than it is automatically registered to me. I dont have a big problem with gun registration simply because I am not a criminal and will not use the firearms for any criminal act. I would have a problem if it cost me money to do thought...
2007-10-02 06:42:55 · answer #5 · answered by SVT_SEATTLE 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Registration infringes. I agree that a gun should be fired and a bullet maintained, however the rest violates the Constitution.
2007-10-02 06:31:47 · answer #6 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋