SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (692366)1/11/2013 3:54:02 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575535
 
TWY, I'm in favor of a national registration database for firearms

So all firearms need to be registered. Since we WERE talking about large capacity magazines and you said they need to be "strictly" regulated, I assume you mean they must be registered also. Correct? So you say law abiding citizens can own say an AR15 with a 20 shot magazine as long as both are registered. Is that correct?
Can I assume that the registration process should be straight forward, not costly, and routine if a background check is passed?



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (692366)1/11/2013 4:04:59 PM
From: d[-_-]b2 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1575535
 
I'm in favor of a national registration database for firearms.

Why - do you really believe a database will stop violence?

Canada tried this and it cost a lot of money and it did nothing.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (692366)1/11/2013 8:58:52 PM
From: Brumar891 Recommendation  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1575535
 
A few things to think about:

Most states don't have registration now and aren't going to start, so the federal government couldn't piggyback off state registrations that don't exist. There also is no existing federal database of weapons. So the federal govt would have to start from scratch, asking owners of the 300M guns now in private hands to report their weapons. I can guarantee you virtually NO gun owners would comply with the law. I wouldn't myself and I'd strongly urge everyone else to not comply. Everyone would assume registration was the first step to a ban. I don't believe even liberal gun owners would comply. Does anyone think bentway would register all his weapons? I don't. I doubt any of these liberals would either:

From: bentway Read Replies (1) of 211891
I've also got a 12 gauge riot pump with 00 buck. I'd hope just racking a round into the chamber would be enough to send someone packing - it's a scary sound! You could still just blow their legs off with it.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28607918

From: bentway of 212515
I don't want only conservatives to be armed.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28621506


From: Wharf Rat Read Replies (1) of 211891
"I'm an excellent shot."

I'm not, hence a 12 gauge with double aught buck. Point and click. Mine isn't sawed off, tho.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28607914
From: Dale Baker Read Replies (1) of 212515
I think this is the model I have, also LR:


http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28621873

From: T L Comiskey Respond to of 212515
Now Im down to my grand dads gun...

A 1927..SxS

LC Smith...........12 gauge..........



http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28621899

So this would immediately make criminals out of a very sizeable portion of the population and create a giant black market in unregistered guns.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (692366)1/12/2013 2:50:29 PM
From: i-node2 Recommendations  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1575535
 
>> I'm in favor of a national registration database for firearms.

Right, Ten. Great idea.

Because after all, when that tyrannical dictator is trying to consolidate power, he absolutely needs to know where the guns are.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (692366)1/12/2013 4:29:08 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 1575535
 
that's the last thing we need, let the tyrant know where the guns are so he can knock on your door and take them.

why would we need that anyway ??



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (692366)1/12/2013 5:34:27 PM
From: d[-_-]b3 Recommendations  Respond to of 1575535
 
Death of a Long-Gun Registry

Canada sank $2.7 billion into a pointless project.
By John R. Lott Jr. & Gary Mauser

nationalreview.com

February 20, 2012 4:00 A.M.

Despite spending a whopping $2.7 billion on creating and running a long-gun registry, Canadians never reaped any benefits from the project. The legislation to end the program finally passed the Parliament on Wednesday. Even though the country started registering long guns in 1998, the registry never solved a single murder. Instead it has been an enormous waste of police officers’ time, diverting their efforts from patrolling Canadian streets and doing traditional policing activities.

Gun-control advocates have long claimed that registration is a safety issue, and their reasoning is straightforward: If a gun has been left at a crime scene and it was registered to the person who committed the crime, the registry will link the crime gun back to the criminal.

Nice logic, but reality never worked that way. Crime guns are very rarely left at the crime scene, and when they are left at the scene, they have not been registered — criminals are not stupid enough to leave behind a gun that’s registered to them. Even in the few cases where registered crime guns are left at the scene, it is usually because the criminal has been seriously injured or killed, so these crimes would have been solved even without registration

The statistics speak for themselves. From 2003 to 2009, there were 4,257 homicides in Canada, 1,314 of which were committed with firearms. Data provided last fall by the Library of Parliament reveals that the weapon was identified in fewer than a third of the homicides with firearms, and that about three-quarters of the identified weapons were not registered. Of the weapons that were registered, about half were registered to someone other than the person accused of the homicide. In just 62 cases — that is, only 4.7 percent of all firearm homicides — was the gun registered to the accused. As most homicides in Canada are not committed with a gun, the 62 cases correspond to only about 1 percent of all homicides.

To repeat, during these seven years, there were only 62 cases — nine a year — where it was even conceivable that registration made a difference. But apparently, the registry was not important even in those cases. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Chiefs of Police have not yet provided a single example in which tracing was of more than peripheral importance in solving a case.

The problem isn’t just with the long-gun registry. The data provided above cover all guns, including handguns. There is no evidence that, since the handgun registry was started in 1934, it has been important in solving a single homicide.

Looking at just long guns shows that since 1997, there have been three murders in which the gun was registered to the accused. The Canadian government doesn’t provide any information on whether those three accused individuals were convicted.

Nor is there any evidence that registration reduced homicides. Research published last year by McMaster University professor Caillin Langmann in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence confirmed what other academic studies have found: “This study failed to demonstrate a beneficial association between legislation and firearm homicide rates between 1974 and 2008.” There is not a single refereed academic study by criminologists or economists that has found a significant benefit from gun laws. A recent Angus Reid poll indicates that Canadians already understand this, with only 13 percent believing that the registry has been successful.