Sometimes, as with the “one gun a month” schemes, it is a little difficult to see the sneaky way the anti-gun owner bigots try to get universal gun registration. But with this one they only barely lower the profile:
Local Law “A” for 2009 would tightly regulate “in the interests of public safety” all ammunition sold in Albany County. Not just ammo for handguns, which already is closely monitored by state law, but all rifle and shotgun ammunition as well. Hunting and target shooting ammo, basically. Anyone buying rounds or shells, even .22s, would have to show identification, declare the gun and have its serial number registered with the ammo seller. The buyer would have to state his intent of use, and could be refused the purchase. The ammo seller, at the same time, would be required to keep records for 10 years.
Registration of guns and gun owners over the years has cost people billions of dollars (two billion in Canada alone in the last decade or so) and about 100 million innocent lives (in genocides from Africa to the Ukraine). The number of crimes solved through the use of gun and gun owner registries is asymptotically close to zero.
In Canada if you ask the gun grabbers how many crimes the police have solved through the use of the gun registry they will subtly change the subject and say, “The registry is used thousands of times each day.” or some such thing. Yes, the registry get a thousands of hits each day by the police. But it just part of a standard query on a person. That doesn’t mean it provided any useful data. And it certainly doesn’t mean it helped solve a crime. John Lott spoke at the 2000 Gun Rights Policy Conference and told us that in Hawaii the police estimate they spend 50,000 hours per year of police time involved in registration efforts. Most of which is paperwork. Yet when you talk to the police they can’t identify even one crime where this has helped. Guns are virtually never left at that crime scene. It’s not in my notes but I recall Lott telling us that when pressed hard enough Canada can support the claim that there was one crime solved through the use the registry which has been, in one form or another, in use for decades.
So if a gun registration scheme has literally only a one in a million (or less) chance of solving a crime what do you think the real reason the gun grabbers keep pushing for registration? I can only think of four possible reasons:
They are ignorant
They are stupid
They are insane
They want to confiscate the guns
In regard to #1, they have been told again and again. Any ignorance on their part is incredibly willful.
In regards to #2, if they are smart enough to count votes they are smart enough to count crimes solved. It is not because they are that stupid.
In regards to #3, this might be true in some cases. They are so blinded by grief over the loss of a loved one that they are not thinking rationally. But this is not the case for the vast majority of gun grabbers.
In regards to #4, this is the only answer I can come up with that makes any sense. Those that want to register firearms and/or their owners so they can enable the elimination of gun ownership.
Yeah. I thought of “insane” while writing out my responses and forgot to go back and update the count.
I would add another option. Maybe it’s the same as #4, or maybe not but…
5. It’s a chance to increase their power. I’d bet that half of the gun grabbers don’t really give a lick about guns or gun control, but they take-hold of the issue as something of a vote-getter from population centers and a way to take power from people.
Just my two cents.
As a vote getter, gun restriction is a very poor choice nationally, and a poor to very poor choice locally in most places. That leaves #3 and #4.
If we want to discuss the issue of vote getters generally, we should start with the two Reagan landslides. That is a model for success that’s been ignored ever since it happened. It was ignored as it was happening for that matter.
3 and 4. Nick’s #5, first clause, could be seen as a sub set in #4. The gun grabbers do care about guns and gun owners in that they a; hate them, b; see them as political opposition, and c; fear them. a, b and c are all good reasons to oppress gun owners if you’re a bigoted, unprincipled, irrational, fearful, anti American power monger. The other reason would be that you’re a criminal. Criminals hate and fear gun owers.
Joe, an acquaintance who works for St.Maries Police Dept. said they received a fax from the Montana State Police which stated that the Obama administration intended to try to pass a law that everyone had to have a 1,000.00 insurance bond,per every two firearms and that it would be up to local law enforcement to check on compliance. Needless to say, all of the city and county deputies would quit first or not comply. I think this is just gossip (for now) but if you hear anything in Moscow let us know.
That sounds like a distortion of the bill introduced in the Illinois legislature recently.
If it comes up on the national level I’ll blog about it. But at this time I suspect it’s just a rumor.
Well, the insurance idea is real, and I’d not be surprised if some of the Montana LEs or those in other states, took the civil disobedience route. If they just quit, all that happens is they’re replaced by some young boot lickers. The BLs will follow any order and gladly, to demonstrate loyalty to their new employers, or to get their jollies. We already know how this works.
Aside from all that, the feds can screw with “violators” all they want and do it by remote control. They can get to your bank records and accounts, soon they’ll be involved in your health care decisions, they could violate your right to vote, et al. They can ruin your life without leaving the comfort of their offices and with no help from local LE. Before long, they may be able to turn off your car (you have heard about the proposal to require GPS transponders in cars so they can track your driving habits? Couple that with On-Star style technology and bingo. It’s all in the name of “Global Warming”, carbon footprint and all that rot). We’re headed for “techno-tyranny” here and there’s little anyone outside the system can do. With all the federal departments and all the charters therein, some of this stuff can happen without a vote, just like a new BAFTE ruling.