Yes...gun registration solves no crime, and eventually allows for confiscation...

[2aguy]

This is from Dr. John Lott in response to a stupid New York Times editorial pushing gun registration....

Correcting New York Times' oped: "Gun Control That Actually Works" - Crime Prevention Research Center

Dear Letters Editor:

Alan Berlow quotes one person who isn’t worried about gun registration leading to confiscation (“Gun Control That Actually Works,” May 31). But this isn’t very assuring. In 2013, New York City used registration lists to confiscate guns. Americans have seen this happen in California, Chicago, and Connecticut.

Evidence suggests registration has not been important to solving crimes. The D.C. police department stated in a 2013 deposition that it could not “recall any specific instance where registration records were used to determine who committed a crime.”

Despite registration since 1960, Hawaii has had a similar experience.

In 2012, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police could not provide even a single example of tracing being of more than peripheral importance to solving a case.

Berlow acknowledges that, at least from 2006 to 2014, no gun crimes were solved using the registry created by the National Firearms Act (which includes only machine guns and short-barrel firearms).

Despite hundreds of thousands of law enforcement hours spent enforcing these rules over decades, there is no evidence these laws reduced crime

 

[Juan de Fuca]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

 

[2aguy]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

Tell that to Britain and Australia...

 

[Blackrook]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

A year ago I was saying that the next liberal cause was men in the women's restroom and the liberals said that was silly.

Today, I am saying that the next liberal cause is prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends.

Is that silly? Because Dhara has already revealed that is the plan.

 

[Slade3200]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

A year ago I was saying that the next liberal cause was men in the women's restroom and the liberals said that was silly.

Today, I am saying that the next liberal cause is prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends.

Is that silly? Because Dhara has already revealed that is the plan.

"Today, I am saying that the next liberal cause is prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends."

What is this all about??

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is from Dr. John Lott in response to a stupid New York Times editorial pushing gun registration....

Correcting New York Times' oped: "Gun Control That Actually Works" - Crime Prevention Research Center

Dear Letters Editor:

Alan Berlow quotes one person who isn’t worried about gun registration leading to confiscation (“Gun Control That Actually Works,” May 31). But this isn’t very assuring. In 2013, New York City used registration lists to confiscate guns. Americans have seen this happen in California, Chicago, and Connecticut.

Evidence suggests registration has not been important to solving crimes. The D.C. police department stated in a 2013 deposition that it could not “recall any specific instance where registration records were used to determine who committed a crime.”

Despite registration since 1960, Hawaii has had a similar experience.

In 2012, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police could not provide even a single example of tracing being of more than peripheral importance to solving a case.

Berlow acknowledges that, at least from 2006 to 2014, no gun crimes were solved using the registry created by the National Firearms Act (which includes only machine guns and short-barrel firearms).

Despite hundreds of thousands of law enforcement hours spent enforcing these rules over decades, there is no evidence these laws reduced crime

Wrong.

This fails as a slippery slope fallacy; it’s ignorant and ridiculous.

 

[Arianrhod]

This is from Dr. John Lott in response to a stupid New York Times editorial pushing gun registration....

Correcting New York Times' oped: "Gun Control That Actually Works" - Crime Prevention Research Center

Dear Letters Editor:

Alan Berlow quotes one person who isn’t worried about gun registration leading to confiscation (“Gun Control That Actually Works,” May 31). But this isn’t very assuring. In 2013, New York City used registration lists to confiscate guns. Americans have seen this happen in California, Chicago, and Connecticut.

Evidence suggests registration has not been important to solving crimes. The D.C. police department stated in a 2013 deposition that it could not “recall any specific instance where registration records were used to determine who committed a crime.”

Despite registration since 1960, Hawaii has had a similar experience.

In 2012, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police could not provide even a single example of tracing being of more than peripheral importance to solving a case.

Berlow acknowledges that, at least from 2006 to 2014, no gun crimes were solved using the registry created by the National Firearms Act (which includes only machine guns and short-barrel firearms).

Despite hundreds of thousands of law enforcement hours spent enforcing these rules over decades, there is no evidence these laws reduced crime

IOW, this is another "EVERYONE SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO CARRY AT ALL TIMES TO MAKE US ALL SAFER!!!1!!" thread.

What's your agenda? Federal law, state law, local law? What's the lower/upper age limit in your universe? "Everyone over the age of four and under the age of 104 must be required to carry at all times"? No limits on visual impairment?

How much of my tax money does the Party of Smaller Gubmint propose to take to implement this "KEEP AMERICANS SAFE FROM AMERICANS" law?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

Tell that to Britain and Australia...

False comparison fallacy.

You truly are a moron.

Unlike Britain and Australia, which are democracies, the United States is a Constitutional Republic; we have the Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to our Constitution which makes ‘gun confiscation’ impossible.

And here’s why:

Second Amendment: there is an individual right to own firearms, no state our jurisdictions may ‘ban’ all firearms, consequently any law authorizing ‘confiscation’ would be struck down as un-Constitutional.

Fourth Amendment: it requires government to have a warrant before it can search citizens or their property, or to seize their property – no warrant, no gun ‘confiscation.’

Fifth Amendment: requires government to afford citizens due process and just compensation before it can seize private property. That means citizens have the right to challenge the taking of each firearm; if a citizen owns ten guns, a hearing must be conducted for each of the ten firearms, and just compensation determined.

Therefore, there will never be ‘gun confiscation,’ no measure ‘authorizing’ it would survive a court challenge, absent a law authorizing ‘confiscation’ no warrant may be issued, and the burden of adjudicating the taking of over 300 million firearms wound render ‘confiscation’ impossible.

Last, and as already correctly noted – no one wants to ‘take’ your guns; it’s a moronic, delusional lie you and other brain dead conservatives dreamed up, the result of your ignorance and stupidity.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

A year ago I was saying that the next liberal cause was men in the women's restroom and the liberals said that was silly.

Today, I am saying that the next liberal cause is prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends.

Is that silly? Because Dhara has already revealed that is the plan.

It’s silly and a lie, no one advocates for ‘men in women’s bathrooms,’ it’s a moronic contrivance of the right.

Claiming that liberals advocate prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends is likewise a ridiculous, idiotic conservative lie.

So don’t worry, your record of being wrong, idiotic, and a liar remains perfect.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am willing to bet that most liberals would not like to see the confiscation of guns. In fact, I bet most Americans would not condone such a thing happening. The very idea of someone declaring they are going to pickup 300,000,000 million guns is laughable as hell. It's a pipe dream from the squeamish scaredy cats, no one is coming for your guns the whole idea is silly.

A year ago I was saying that the next liberal cause was men in the women's restroom and the liberals said that was silly.

Today, I am saying that the next liberal cause is prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends.

Is that silly? Because Dhara has already revealed that is the plan.

"Today, I am saying that the next liberal cause is prosecuting fathers for wanting to have children with their wives/girlfriends."

What is this all about??

It's about the stupidity common to most on the right.