Firearm registration = firearm confiscation

[Natural Citizen]

It does say well regulated.

Yeah. Looking at The Federalist (numbers 28 by Hamilton and 46 by Madison) the assumption and expectation of The Framers that all States would marshall their forces and act jointly to crush the usurpers' forces is crystal clear. This is where well regulated militias comes into the equation.

So, Marshall their forces. What exactly do you take from that, Brain? Placed into context with well regulated. It's a toss up, if you ask me. I teeter totter back and forth. Because back themn well regulated just meant well prepared, able bodied. That's what that meant.

But, on the other hand, the fact remains that yes the states have the right to marshal its forces against federal usupers. Militias would by default agents of the states. Regulated, so to speak.

 

[rightwinger]

The second amendment encourages the registration of firearms

No, it doesn't. It's not even worth the time to elaborate as your statement is wrong on its face.

A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state

You cannot regulate your militias without registering the weapons and knowing what you have available to you to keep your state secure

"The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it."

http://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

Why are you leftists incapable of doing even the slightest bit of research?

Problems with English?

A well functioning militia in good working order is trained, has a command structure and knows what weapons it’s members have

 

[satrebil]

A well functioning militia in good working order is trained, has a command structure and knows what weapons it’s members have

I'm not in a militia, dingus. You can be sure that when I am I'll let my commanding officer know what I'm bringing to bear.

 

[hunarcy]

The second amendment encourages the registration of firearms

No, it doesn't. It's not even worth the time to elaborate as your statement is wrong on its face.

A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state

You cannot regulate your militias without registering the weapons and knowing what you have available to you to keep your state secure

Your ignorance is overwhelming. "well regulated" means trained and in good working order, not having weapons registered, as the weapons were the responsibility of the militiaman.

What Does Well Regulated Really Mean?

Gun Laws and What the Second Amendment Intended

 

[Lesh]

There are only two references to the Militia in the Constitution. The 2A where they speak of a "Well Regulated Militia" and Article 1 Section 8 where they describe that Militia

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

So that militia must be organized, disciplined,and have rank and training

 

[Wry Catcher]

Obviously it’s a dog whistle, that would be the only reason for firearm registration. We have not had it up to this point obviously we’ve never needed it because it’s not right in anyway. No two ways about it

There are several reasons for gun registration.

• Guns need to be insured, for theft and for misuse
• Guns need to be registered, and when sold, traded or gifted the recipient needs to be eligible to own a gun
• Gun Ownership requires responsibility
• When a gun is stolen, and discovered in the possession of another, they can be prosecuted for possession of stolen property, which gives law enforcement probable cause to get a warrant and search their home, business or car
• Guns stolen or lost can be returned to the lawful owner.

 

[debbiedowner]

Obviously it’s a dog whistle, that would be the only reason for firearm registration. We have not had it up to this point obviously we’ve never needed it because it’s not right in anyway. No two ways about it

What the hell are you talking about? Drinking breakfast again?

 

[Snouter]

Wry Catcher, you forget to add "so firearms can be taxed each year like a car so every government employee in town knows what you own" to your list.

 

[Pilot1]

The ONLY reason for registration is a s precursor to confiscation. It is nobody's business what guns someone owns. It is a personal, private, and security issue.

 

[hunarcy]

Obviously it’s a dog whistle, that would be the only reason for firearm registration. We have not had it up to this point obviously we’ve never needed it because it’s not right in anyway. No two ways about it

There are several reasons for gun registration.

• Guns need to be insured, for theft and for misuse
• Guns need to be registered, and when sold, traded or gifted the recipient needs to be eligible to own a gun
• Gun Ownership requires responsibility
• When a gun is stolen, and discovered in the possession of another, they can be prosecuted for possession of stolen property, which gives law enforcement probable cause to get a warrant and search their home, business or car
• Guns stolen or lost can be returned to the lawful owner.

Nope! Not one thing in that is true.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wry Catcher, you forget to add "so firearms can be taxed each year like a car so every government employee in town knows what you own" to your list.

Good point, but those taxes are passed by local or state governments. It's doubtful Red States will tolerate a gun tax, and it is unlikely any elected official will vote for such a tax.

Of course Law Enforcement will and should know which homes have firearms.

 

[Hum Dinger]

Guns should be bonded.

 

[Pilot1]

Guns should be bonded.

Bonded to what? The owner's hand?

 

[Meister]

Wry Catcher, you forget to add "so firearms can be taxed each year like a car so every government employee in town knows what you own" to your list.

Good point, but those taxes are passed by local or state governments. It's doubtful Red States will tolerate a gun tax, and it is unlikely any elected official will vote for such a tax.

Of course Law Enforcement will and should know which homes have firearms.

They will know who the law abiding citizens are that own them and would never have to worry about. And, not the ones that they need to worry about.
In otherwords, it solves nothing....unless you're thinking about a police state where they would know where the majority of the guns are located.

 

[BlindBoo]

The second exists for the sole purpose of defending the states against federal usurpers

It was to ensure that no State or Federal government could confiscate the individuals in the Militia's weapons. Citizens were allowed to keep them in their homes. The Militias were the first line of defense against invaders while the Government raised an Army, not against the government of the people.

 

[Meister]

The second exists for the sole purpose of defending the states against federal usurpers

It was to ensure that no State or Federal government could confiscate the individuals in the Militia's weapons. Citizens were allowed to keep them in their homes. The Militias were the first line of defense against invaders while the Government raised an Army, not against the government of the people.

Isn't this just a liberal opinion? It's one way you could look at it, but not the only way. The SC thinks you're wrong, BlindBoo

 

[Pilot1]

The individual right to keep and bear arms is separate from the militia clause.

 

[BlindBoo]

The second amendment encourages the registration of firearms

No, it doesn't. It's not even worth the time to elaborate as your statement is wrong on its face.

A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state

You cannot regulate your militias without registering the weapons and knowing what you have available to you to keep your state secure

"The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it."

http://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

Why are you leftists incapable of doing even the slightest bit of research?

Lets just say that the recent mass murderers were not part of any well regulated militia.

The second exists for the sole purpose of defending the states against federal usurpers

It was to ensure that no State or Federal government could confiscate the individuals in the Militia's weapons. Citizens were allowed to keep them in their homes. The Militias were the first line of defense against invaders while the Government raised an Army, not against the government of the people.

Isn't this just a liberal opinion? It's one way you could look at it, but not the only way. The SC thinks you're wrong, BlindBoo

Right wing judicial activism by the late Scalia I believe. Didn't he also spell out a case for reasonable regulation in that as well? Besides that amendment was written the 18th century and we're in the 21st now, some 70 + year into the nuclear age. But it never had anything to do with protecting the States from the Federal Government.

 

[pismoe]

Personally I will not own a registered weapon.

----------------------------------- thats why i said what i said earlier as Ace said that all his guns are properly registered . Unless the gov is ILLEGALLY registering guns into computers which i don't doubt i never heard of anyone registering their guns except as talk . As if Ace owns any guns .

 

[pismoe]

Obviously it’s a dog whistle, that would be the only reason for firearm registration. We have not had it up to this point obviously we’ve never needed it because it’s not right in anyway. No two ways about it

Are they going to take our cars away before they take our guns away? Those have been registered for a while now, should we be worried about confiscation?

--------------------------------- its different , car are not a RIGHT that government would go after . The main reason to not have registration of guns is because of a Healthy distrust of 'government' Slade .