2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: aletheuo137 on February 07, 2022, 06:51:29 AM
-
https://rumble.com/vu7rh5-atf-has-a-national-database-with-nearly-a-billion-guns-on-it-what-for.html
Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk
-
Solving gun crimes?
Gun confiscation?
General number tracking?
Good Question
-
Solving gun crimes?
Gun confiscation?
General number tracking?
Good Question
The good ole myth on supporting registration. So they can track down when a gun is used in a crime. Which means after the fact that the crime was committed. Kind of like how most police operate when you call them. Most of the time it's after the crime was committed. Rarely is HPD or other LEO's on the spot as it's happening.
-
The good ole myth on supporting registration. So they can track down when a gun is used in a crime. Which means after the fact that the crime was committed. Kind of like how most police operate when you call them. Most of the time it's after the crime was committed. Rarely is HPD or other LEO's on the spot as it's happening.
Registration is solely for the purpose of confiscation. That is it.
Like you say, very rarely do police prevent crime, they mostly document it, clean up the mess as best as they can, and
sometimes even catching the criminal.
Registration is the number one reason for all the gun/boating accidents.
-
Well, it could well be for them rounding up the millions and millions of gun owners and then we all will do the Hokey Pokey.
And instead of doing the hokey pokey and turning ourselves around.....
they'll make us turn our firearms in......
Hoookee Pokeee!!!!......... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
It's the slippy-slope result.
The NFA said no federal firearms list of gun owners. But they had to figure out what to do with FFL records when one goes out of business.
The solution was to send the paper forms to the ATF. If there was a need to request the FFL records in an investigation, the ATF would provide those records in lieu of the defunct FFL.
Now that they have a mountain of paper records that's impossible to search in a timely manner, they are digitizing the paper. That can lead to a computerized search of at least the records the ATF possesses. This, in effect, is a firearm buyer's database.
When HPD or a gun seller does an NICS check from the FBI, they don't send the specific gun info. That's kept by the FFL. The process keeps gun info out of the hands of the feds. However, when an FFL closes shop and hands over that info to the ATF, the process is short-circuited. The feds now have the number, type and serial numbers of guns sold by that dealer. This was totally prohibited in the NFA, but now we see how things have become.
-
slippy-slope?
sounds like someone familiar...
It's the slippy-slope result.
The NFA said no federal firearms list of gun owners. But they had to figure out what to do with FFL records when one goes out of business.
The solution was to send the paper forms to the ATF. If there was a need to request the FFL records in an investigation, the ATF would provide those records in lieu of the defunct FFL.
Now that they have a mountain of paper records that's impossible to search in a timely manner, they are digitizing the paper. That can lead to a computerized search of at least the records the ATF possesses. This, in effect, is a firearm buyer's database.
When HPD or a gun seller does an NICS check from the FBI, they don't send the specific gun info. That's kept by the FFL. The process keeps gun info out of the hands of the feds. However, when an FFL closes shop and hands over that info to the ATF, the process is short-circuited. The feds now have the number, type and serial numbers of guns sold by that dealer. This was totally prohibited in the NFA, but now we see how things have become.
-
The NFA said no federal firearms list of gun owners. But they had to figure out what to do with FFL records when one goes out of business.
The solution was to send the paper forms to the ATF.
Keep your local gun shop in business so your 4473 doesn't go to ATF.
-
Keep your local gun shop in business so your 4473 doesn't go to ATF.
I haven't filled out a 4473 in over 30 years.
Don't intend to start now.
:wave:
-
I haven't filled out a 4473 in over 30 years.
Don't intend to start now.
:wave:
No need to post that. "They" already know ... :shake:
-
The good ole myth on supporting registration. So they can track down when a gun is used in a crime. Which means after the fact that the crime was committed. Kind of like how most police operate when you call them. Most of the time it's after the crime was committed. Rarely is HPD or other LEO's on the spot as it's happening.
Why do you say it is a myth?
A gun that is registered and later found to have been used in a crime is going to give some lead for a homicide detective to follow up on. It isn't a trump card but do you think investigations have never been solved by using a gun registration list?
-
Why do you say it is a myth?
A gun that is registered and later found to have been used in a crime is going to give some lead for a homicide detective to follow up on. It isn't a trump card but do you think investigations have never been solved by using a gun registration list?
And the purpose?
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Why do you say it is a myth?
A gun that is registered and later found to have been used in a crime is going to give some lead for a homicide detective to follow up on. It isn't a trump card but do you think investigations have never been solved by using a gun registration list?
It's a myth, because a gun registration rarely, if ever, leads investigators to the perp.
Anyone who uses a gun registered in their own name to premeditatedly commit a crime is a moron. Chances are, the perp was found through witness ID, fingerprint or DNA ID, a license plate, car description, etc.
If there's no other evidence the gun's owner was the criminal, they can easily claim the gun is missing and they hadn't noticed. Must have been lost or stolen.
Hard to prove it wasn't.
Most crime guns are not left at the scene anyway. How, exactly, will the Cops get the serial number of a murder weapon they don't have so they might match it to the registered owner?
For registrations to work, the Cops first need the gun.
Then they need ballistics to match the gun to the victim.
Then they need the registration record.
Then they need to locate the last registered owner.
Then they need to find out if the registered owner still owned it and had possession of it (not all states do permits or registrations for private sales).
If the owner is smart, he won't commit a crime with a gun registered to him. He'll find a "clean" gun with no way to trace it.
At that point, registration is 100% useless.
So many ways to see that registration is pointless.
-
It's a myth, because a gun registration rarely, if ever, leads investigators to the perp.
Anyone who uses a gun registered in their own name to premeditatedly commit a crime is a moron. Chances are, the perp was found through witness ID, fingerprint or DNA ID, a license plate, car description, etc.
If there's no other evidence the gun's owner was the criminal, they can easily claim the gun is missing and they hadn't noticed. Must have been lost or stolen.
Hard to prove it wasn't.
Most crime guns are not left at the scene anyway. How, exactly, will the Cops get the serial number of a murder weapon they don't have so they might match it to the registered owner?
For registrations to work, the Cops first need the gun.
Then they need ballistics to match the gun to the victim.
Then they need the registration record.
Then they need to locate the last registered owner.
Then they need to find out if the registered owner still owned it and had possession of it (not all states do permits or registrations for private sales).
If the owner is smart, he won't commit a crime with a gun registered to him. He'll find a "clean" gun with no way to trace it.
At that point, registration is 100% useless.
So many ways to see that registration is pointless.
How do you know gun registrations rarely lead to the suspect?
Morons do commit crimes BTW.
Say someone tosses a murder weapon of an unsolved into the river and it gets found later. Cops run the serial number and find the person it was last registered to. Is that the suspect? Maybe, maybe not but it is somewhere to start. Now cops are looking at this registered owner, they can see if he has a motive or connection. Work to see where the firearm owner was during the time of the murder, etc and it might find enough evidence to solve the crime. Or maybe it turns out that the registered owner sold the gun and then they can tell the police who they sold it to and now they have another person of interest to look at and.
Without a gun registry they have a serial number with no links to any private persons.
-
And the purpose?
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
I don't understand your question. The purpose would be to solve a crime.
-
I don't understand your question. The purpose would be to solve a crime.
I'm asking what the purpose of registration is for. Since I say it's a myth that it's so important to help prevent or solve crimes. If that's the reason, then shouldn't all knives have a serial number on them and be registered also? Because there are more knife injuries/deaths than gun injuries/deaths annually. Like 6,000 to 500. So should resources be diverted to focus on knives first. And even golf clubs since just under 200 golf clubs are used to kill people annually.
I get what you're saying, but the nosey government is overstepping here and making an excuse which people who trust them or are anti 2a will believe. Can reg for guns be used to solve or prevent future crimes? I'm sure it can, but not to the high success rate that they are using to justify reg.
Like Flapp mentioned, if a gun with an intact serial number is found, it's after the crime has been committed, The 1 example I can see where it would help prevent future crimes is if someone is buying and then selling guns to felons as a business. They can trace all the illegally sold guns back to 1 person. But refer to my sentence above about it not being so much a need that their excuse to register holds any weight.
Just like how HPD testified twice in 2 weeks that bringing in the gun to physically inspect is needed. They claim in 2021, 55 illegal guns were brought in by people to register. Of which 30 were military. 55 sounds like a lot until you realize the average annual registration is 25,000-30K firearms brought in for physical registration. So that's a very small % for HPD to justify the need. Plus they already lost the lawsuit, so this would be in violation of the judges order. Then add in that felons would not come in to register a gun.
-
How do you know gun registrations rarely lead to the suspect?
Morons do commit crimes BTW.
Say someone tosses a murder weapon of an unsolved into the river and it gets found later. Cops run the serial number and find the person it was last registered to. Is that the suspect? Maybe, maybe not but it is somewhere to start. Now cops are looking at this registered owner, they can see if he has a motive or connection. Work to see where the firearm owner was during the time of the murder, etc and it might find enough evidence to solve the crime. Or maybe it turns out that the registered owner sold the gun and then they can tell the police who they sold it to and now they have another person of interest to look at and.
Without a gun registry they have a serial number with no links to any private persons.
Maryland tried to go the extra mile. They "deduced" that if they can create a database of all firearms in the state, they could then use the markings on the casing and bullet to lead them to the person's gun that committed the crime. No need for the gun to be recovered at the scene.
Maryland scraps gun “fingerprint” database after 15 failed years
Millions of dollars later, Maryland has officially decided that its 15-year effort to store and catalog
the “fingerprints” of thousands of handguns was a failure.
Since 2000, the state required that gun manufacturers fire every handgun to be sold here and
send the spent bullet casing to authorities. The idea was to build a database of “ballistic fingerprints”
to help solve future crimes.
But the system — plagued by technological problems — never solved a single case. Now the hundreds
of thousands of accumulated casings could be sold for scrap.
https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/maryland-scraps-gun-fingerprint-database-after-15-failed-years/147216
That's what most of us call "evidence." Evidence that directly supports my conclusion: "It's a myth, because a gun registration rarely, if ever, leads investigators to the perp."
No hypothetical "what if" BS required.
After rereading your hypothetical BS, I realized you don't know how investigations work.
If a gun with an intact serial number is found, it is tracked from the manufacturer to the distributor and retailer. The retailer's records then identify the buyer. From there, investigators interview that buyer and anyone else who purchased the gun after him. At some point, they may or may not find out the last person who owned it. Most often, they find that the gun was stolen. 80% of criminals IN PRISON who used firearms to commit crimes said they used guns that were stolen so they can't be traced to them. The others used guns from friends, family members or associates (other gang members/criminals) who they trusted not to be undercover cops. Rarely are guns used that are owned by the registered buyer.
-
I'm asking what the purpose of registration is for. Since I say it's a myth that it's so important to help prevent or solve crimes. If that's the reason, then shouldn't all knives have a serial number on them and be registered also? Because there are more knife injuries/deaths than gun injuries/deaths annually. Like 6,000 to 500. So should resources be diverted to focus on knives first. And even golf clubs since just under 200 golf clubs are used to kill people annually.
I get what you're saying, but the nosey government is overstepping here and making an excuse which people who trust them or are anti 2a will believe. Can reg for guns be used to solve or prevent future crimes? I'm sure it can, but not to the high success rate that they are using to justify reg.
Like Flapp mentioned, if a gun with an intact serial number is found, it's after the crime has been committed, The 1 example I can see where it would help prevent future crimes is if someone is buying and then selling guns to felons as a business. They can trace all the illegally sold guns back to 1 person. But refer to my sentence above about it not being so much a need that their excuse to register holds any weight.
Just like how HPD testified twice in 2 weeks that bringing in the gun to physically inspect is needed. They claim in 2021, 55 illegal guns were brought in by people to register. Of which 30 were military. 55 sounds like a lot until you realize the average annual registration is 25,000-30K firearms brought in for physical registration. So that's a very small % for HPD to justify the need. Plus they already lost the lawsuit, so this would be in violation of the judges order. Then add in that felons would not come in to register a gun.
It doesn't have to be a single reason, it can be multiple reasons and you might get different answers depending on who you ask. So for example, if a law is voted on, everyone legislator can have their own reason/combination of reasons why they voted on it. So in this case, some may focus on a crime fighting aspect, some may focus on a gun confiscation aspect, etc etc.
Whether gun registration solved enough crimes to justify continued registration requirements is a mostly a subjective question, how many murderers caught would justify the existence of a registration system?
To answer it I would want to see what evidence there was on the matter. So far as I have looked I haven't seen any numbers that address this specific question. Maybe the data is published somewhere and I haven't seen it but maybe it just hasn't been gathered as a dataset.
-
Maryland tried to go the extra mile. They "deduced" that if they can create a database of all firearms in the state, they could then use the markings on the casing and bullet to lead them to the person's gun that committed the crime. No need for the gun to be recovered at the scene.
Maryland scraps gun “fingerprint” database after 15 failed years
https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/maryland-scraps-gun-fingerprint-database-after-15-failed-years/147216
That's what most of us call "evidence." Evidence that directly supports my conclusion: "It's a myth, because a gun registration rarely, if ever, leads investigators to the perp."
No hypothetical "what if" BS required.
After rereading your hypothetical BS, I realized you don't know how investigations work.
If a gun with an intact serial number is found, it is tracked from the manufacturer to the distributor and retailer. The retailer's records then identify the buyer. From there, investigators interview that buyer and anyone else who purchased the gun after him. At some point, they may or may not find out the last person who owned it. Most often, they find that the gun was stolen. 80% of criminals IN PRISON who used firearms to commit crimes said they used guns that were stolen so they can't be traced to them. The others used guns from friends, family members or associates (other gang members/criminals) who they trusted not to be undercover cops. Rarely are guns used that are owned by the registered buyer.
Or you don't realize how investigations work...
And I was aware of this failure of this database but you are doing a bait and switch, trying to use the failure of this system to imply a different system must therefore also be a failure. The two are not directly comparable.
I understand the conclusion you want to be able to draw but you are jumping the gun a bit. I too would be happy to argue against a national database but I am not going to let that bias me in consideration of whether the data supports that. Within the gun rights debate there are all sorts of arguments and datasets thrown around and guess what, they don't all cleanly support one position or the other.
But let me ask you this question, what number of murders being solved by a registration database would it take where you would say the database was worth it?
-
It doesn't have to be a single reason, it can be multiple reasons and you might get different answers depending on who you ask. So for example, if a law is voted on, everyone legislator can have their own reason/combination of reasons why they voted on it. So in this case, some may focus on a crime fighting aspect, some may focus on a gun confiscation aspect, etc etc.
Whether gun registration solved enough crimes to justify continued registration requirements is a mostly a subjective question, how many murderers caught would justify the existence of a registration system?
To answer it I would want to see what evidence there was on the matter. So far as I have looked I haven't seen any numbers that address this specific question. Maybe the data is published somewhere and I haven't seen it but maybe it just hasn't been gathered as a dataset.
Here is what the FBI/CDC publish about knives and gun deaths. So since knives have more deaths, then you should be OK with registering knives too right?
-
But let me ask you this question, what number of murders being solved by a registration database would it take where you would say the database was worth it?
99%
-
Or you don't realize how investigations work...
And I was aware of this failure of this database but you are doing a bait and switch, trying to use the failure of this system to imply a different system must therefore also be a failure. The two are not directly comparable.
I understand the conclusion you want to be able to draw but you are jumping the gun a bit. I too would be happy to argue against a national database but I am not going to let that bias me in consideration of whether the data supports that. Within the gun rights debate there are all sorts of arguments and datasets thrown around and guess what, they don't all cleanly support one position or the other.
But let me ask you this question, what number of murders being solved by a registration database would it take where you would say the database was worth it?
First , tell me what that number currently is If you can't there's a reason. Do you think the government would keep that number secret if it was good for their narrative?
Since when is solving a crime more important than respecting the rights of the individual? I believe you've said on another thread, "It is better that ten guilty persons go free than that one innocent person be convicted."
It's not the job of society to voluntarily surrender their rights so law enforcement can arrest people for crimes they SUSPECT them of committing. As I said, the recovered gun only gets you in the ballpark. If you can't place the suspect/gun owner in the vicinity of the crime at the time, or they have an alibi, the gun's registration is useless. At that point, "My gun must have been stolen," is a plausible excuse, and the registration was a waste of money.
Is it your contention that millions of dollars for registration, plus all the lost productivity of the people having to take time to register, is worth a certain number of potentially solved cases? What would YOUR number be to justify the cost? 10? 100? 1,000? Just one?
-
But let me ask you this question, what number of murders being solved by a registration database would it take where you would say the database was worth it?
Joke's on you. The government doesn't care about murders.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/06/health/us-homicide-rate-increase-nchs-study/index.html
-
Joke's on you. The government doesn't care about murders.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/06/health/us-homicide-rate-increase-nchs-study/index.html
Jeffrey Epstein, Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty, and Kathryn Steinle were all unavailable for comment.
-
Here is what the FBI/CDC publish about knives and gun deaths. So since knives have more deaths, then you should be OK with registering knives too right?
Nowhere did I say I would be ok with it. You are drawing incorrect inferences. If I argued that something is effective it doesn't mean I support it.
-
First , tell me what that number currently is If you can't there's a reason. Do you think the government would keep that number secret if it was good for their narrative?
Since when is solving a crime more important than respecting the rights of the individual? I believe you've said on another thread, "It is better that ten guilty persons go free than that one innocent person be convicted."
It's not the job of society to voluntarily surrender their rights so law enforcement can arrest people for crimes they SUSPECT them of committing. As I said, the recovered gun only gets you in the ballpark. If you can't place the suspect/gun owner in the vicinity of the crime at the time, or they have an alibi, the gun's registration is useless. At that point, "My gun must have been stolen," is a plausible excuse, and the registration was a waste of money.
Is it your contention that millions of dollars for registration, plus all the lost productivity of the people having to take time to register, is worth a certain number of potentially solved cases? What would YOUR number be to justify the cost? 10? 100? 1,000? Just one?
I don't know the numbers, I already stated that in my previous posts. You seem to be concluding that an absence of data proves something but the objective thing to do in the absence of data is to simply remain neutral. Absent data we can neither argue it helps nor can we argue it doesn't help.
Is registration not respecting the rights of the individual? This is a separate question but your question rests on the premise that registration is a violation of rights.
"my gun must have been stolen" is hardly a trump card. It is a hurdle that an investigator would have to overcome but it isn't the automatic end of the road in the investigation.
I am not sure where I would draw the line in terms of murders solved, it is a difficult question. The reason I posed the question to you was to find out whether your objection to the number of murders solved even mattered. Would any number of murders solved justify a registration database?
-
Nowhere did I say I would be ok with it. You are drawing incorrect inferences. If I argued that something is effective it doesn't mean I support it.
My mistake. I thought you supported gun registration. I was wrong.
-
My mistake. I thought you supported gun registration. I was wrong.
He does, but he’s just pretending to be “reasonable”
-
I don't know the numbers, I already stated that in my previous posts. You seem to be concluding that an absence of data proves something but the objective thing to do in the absence of data is to simply remain neutral. Absent data we can neither argue it helps nor can we argue it doesn't help.
Is registration not respecting the rights of the individual? This is a separate question but your question rests on the premise that registration is a violation of rights.
"my gun must have been stolen" is hardly a trump card. It is a hurdle that an investigator would have to overcome but it isn't the automatic end of the road in the investigation.
I am not sure where I would draw the line in terms of murders solved, it is a difficult question. The reason I posed the question to you was to find out whether your objection to the number of murders solved even mattered. Would any number of murders solved justify a registration database?
The only viable, logical, reasonable purpose for firearm registration is confiscation.
Government sells the public on the idea of registration by saying it makes us safer. A registration will solve gun crimes. We would never use it for confiscation.
The Feds have tried all kinds of ways to bypass the NFA prohibition on a national registry. They said "paper records from defunct FFLs are fine, because they take time and resources to search through." Now they are digitizing all of that. The Feds are now pushing for "Universal Background Checks." That scheme won't be effective unless every gun is registered. it's an end-run where first they pass a law that requires 100% registrations, then they argue for registration to "fix" the broken law for UBC. It's not a fluke that they overlooked the implementation of UBC. They are counting on using it to shoehorn a national gun registration into existence.
Without a registry, most of the gun laws that focus on the gun's owner, not the actual operator, are unenforceable. LE needs a list of who owns what that remains current. Of course, criminals won't register, so it's only the law abiding who are complying. That's another reason registration is ineffective at solving crimes. If a stolen/illegally purchased gun issued in a crime, who does the registration lead back to? Ms. Soccer Mom, who carried the gun in her purse for 3 years for protection until the day her purse was stolen? Lot of good that does for any "investigation."
-
My mistake. I thought you supported gun registration. I was wrong.
Honestly I am somewhat on the fence about it. There are good things about it and bad things about it.
-
The only viable, logical, reasonable purpose for firearm registration is confiscation.
Agree to disagree.
Without a registry, most of the gun laws that focus on the gun's owner, not the actual operator, are unenforceable. LE needs a list of who owns what that remains current. Of course, criminals won't register, so it's only the law abiding who are complying. That's another reason registration is ineffective at solving crimes. If a stolen/illegally purchased gun issued in a crime, who does the registration lead back to? Ms. Soccer Mom, who carried the gun in her purse for 3 years for protection until the day her purse was stolen? Lot of good that does for any "investigation."
The criminals who plan on being criminals, sure. What about people who become criminals in the heat of the moment, who aren't planning on committing a crime?.
What about car license plates? Is the only logical, viable, reasonable purpose of a license plate to confiscate cars or otherwise track people?
-
Agree to disagree.
The criminals who plan on being criminals, sure. What about people who become criminals in the heat of the moment, who aren't planning on committing a crime?.
What about car license plates? Is the only logical, viable, reasonable purpose of a license plate to confiscate cars or otherwise track people?
You honestly believe a license plate is for solving crimes? No, they are on the vehicle so the government can quickly do a database search to see if that vehicle is reported stolen, who owns it, where they live, etc. They also use it to associate traffic infractions with the vehicle, because the owner is often on the hook as much as the driver is for paying any fines.
When was the last time you saw a story where a crime, any crime, was solved due to a gun registry alone? Meaning -- that without the gun registry, that crime gun could not have been associated with the current owner and perpetrator? Pick one -- just one.
I'll not hold my breath ... take your time.
You should read this entire article. Among other things, it talks about the failed Canadian Long Gun Registration program:
"Unsurprisingly, while the long-gun registry was in force, in not a single case did the police employ it in order to identify a murderer."
This is the result in every country where a registry was enacted. In many of those countries, firearms were subsequently confiscated shortly after everyone had complied and registered.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/02/against-gun-registration-charles-c-w-cooke/
The article is from 2013, but this debate has bubbled up non-stop for over 40 years prior to that.
-
You honestly believe a license plate is for solving crimes? No, they are on the vehicle so the government can quickly do a database search to see if that vehicle is reported stolen, who owns it, where they live, etc. They also use it to associate traffic infractions with the vehicle, because the owner is often on the hook as much as the driver is for paying any fines.
When was the last time you saw a story where a crime, any crime, was solved due to a gun registry alone? Meaning -- that without the gun registry, that crime gun could not have been associated with the current owner and perpetrator? Pick one -- just one.
I'll not hold my breath ... take your time.
You should read this entire article. Among other things, it talks about the failed Canadian Long Gun Registration program:
"Unsurprisingly, while the long-gun registry was in force, in not a single case did the police employ it in order to identify a murderer."
This is the result in every country where a registry was enacted. In many of those countries, firearms were subsequently confiscated shortly after everyone had complied and registered.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/02/against-gun-registration-charles-c-w-cooke/
The article is from 2013, but this debate has bubbled up non-stop for over 40 years prior to that.
Do you honestly believe crimes are never solved due to a license plate?
You seem to be trying to prove that it doesn't solve the majority of crimes but that is never a position that I have taken. I only said that it is one thing that can be a clue that could lead to a crime being solved. Again, I am not saying it is a guarantee, it is just a clue.
-
Do you honestly believe crimes are never solved due to a license plate?
You seem to be trying to prove that it doesn't solve the majority of crimes but that is never a position that I have taken. I only said that it is one thing that can be a clue that could lead to a crime being solved. Again, I am not saying it is a guarantee, it is just a clue.
You have yet to provide a single case in which gun registration was THE piece of evidence that solved a crime.
Still not holding my breath.
I, however, proved two stories that proved a gun registry cost more than the number of crimes it solves -- namely zero.
Nobody can trace a gun without the gun itself unless in some rare instance a witness could offer police the serial number. Nobody looking out a window witnessing a shooting can tell police what the serial number was. They MIGHT be able to remember the license plate of the car the shooter was driving, but that's not always reliable info. The fact that a registry shows a couple dozen people owning the caliber gun used is not evidence that any of them committed the crime, no more than someone wearing a MAGA hat makes someone more of a suspect in the Jussie hoax. It would take more than the registry to support a warrant to even test the gun for a ballistics match.
You're out of gas. For your analogy to hold, the CAR would have to be recovered at the scene, just like the gun would. Recovery after it leaves the scene only helps place the person in possession of it later. It's not a guaranteed link to the crime.
Forensics would have to prove that car alone was 90%+ certain to be the crime car. Just like ballistics has to match a gun to a bullet recovered at a crime scene. A description of the car, or gun, isn't proof. Then, they have to identify you as the only one with access. Many crimes went unsolved because too many people had access to the murder instrument or getaway vehicle, with no evidence as to who was behind the mask driving/shooting.
-
You have yet to provide a single case in which gun registration was THE piece of evidence that solved a crime.
Still not holding my breath.
I, however, proved two stories that proved a gun registry cost more than the number of crimes it solves -- namely zero.
Nobody can trace a gun without the gun itself unless in some rare instance a witness could offer police the serial number. Nobody looking out a window witnessing a shooting can tell police what the serial number was. They MIGHT be able to remember the license plate of the car the shooter was driving, but that's not always reliable info. The fact that a registry shows a couple dozen people owning the caliber gun used is not evidence that any of them committed the crime, no more than someone wearing a MAGA hat makes someone more of a suspect in the Jussie hoax. It would take more than the registry to support a warrant to even test the gun for a ballistics match.
You're out of gas. For your analogy to hold, the CAR would have to be recovered at the scene, just like the gun would. Recovery after it leaves the scene only helps place the person in possession of it later. It's not a guaranteed link to the crime.
Forensics would have to prove that car alone was 90%+ certain to be the crime car. Just like ballistics has to match a gun to a bullet recovered at a crime scene. A description of the car, or gun, isn't proof. Then, they have to identify you as the only one with access. Many crimes went unsolved because too many people had access to the murder instrument or getaway vehicle, with no evidence as to who was behind the mask driving/shooting.
Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. If no one has gathered the information we wouldn't have any to point to even if it were true, this doesn't prove registration has no benefit. Additionally there are corollary benefits that would not be easy to measure such as crimes prevented due to a registration system.
https://www.gvpedia.org/gun-myths/firearm-reg/
But lets say I found a few cases, would it change your position? People find discarded weapons all the time, in rivers, in bushes, etc. Recover the gun, do a test fire and compare it to bullets in unsolved murders, then run the serial number to find the registered owner. It might not crack the case but you are acting like it could never crack the case.
You don't like registration, perfectly understandable and reasonable, but you seem to desire to prove that there is zero benefit rather than giving up a little ground and admitting that there may be some benefit.
-
Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
Let me paraphrase for you --
"You're right. I can't find a case where gun registration solved any crimes. But that doesn't mean I have to stop believing in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or the magical crime-solving abilities of gun registration."
-
Let me paraphrase for you --
"You're right. I can't find a case where gun registration solved any crimes. But that doesn't mean I have to stop believing in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or the magical crime-solving abilities of gun registration."
Wrong
-
Wrong
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjqfixZ5UasH_KvpLeZbtbXfc_mgMI8lWDTdQVU2QZ4llDYf3Fqbl4Pqa27xBlAc-15ovH9HkjCVZusrEH3bXJoqcl3zxBdoLp7QXLNnaQx1Kfgmd0w2q08ev-KEzcNVKrZQrBuARdmUKuJWtpr3ZMq7SkAOsHcl1d5BGUZ19fuJaOhu9KIVRQ=w452-h467)
-
Wrong
Well, in light of that evidence, I stand corrected!
:rofl: :rofl:
Please, show me the post where you located a case solved by a gun registry. Surely, with all the money the gun control lobby dishes out, there must be at least one case they dredge up like an old moldy rubber hose to beat the snot out of 2A supporters whenever this issue is raised.
Just one. I didn't realize "one" was asking too much.
-
Well, in light of that evidence, I stand corrected!
:rofl: :rofl:
Please, show me the post where you located a case solved by a gun registry. Surely, with all the money the gun control lobby dishes out, there must be at least one case they dredge up like an old moldy rubber hose to beat the snot out of 2A supporters whenever this issue is raised.
Just one. I didn't realize "one" was asking too much.
Ed Duphrane is 1 case.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Ed Duphrane is 1 case.
That's a name. What's the case?
Are you in the middle of watching Shawshank Redemption? with Andy Duphrane?
-
That's a name. What's the case?
Are you in the middle of watching Shawshank Redemption? with Andy Duphrane?
No focus. Its andy. I was being a wise ass.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
No focus. Its andy. I was being a wise ass.
A little more "wise", and a little less "ass", please!
:rofl:
-
You have yet to provide a single case in which gun registration was THE piece of evidence that solved a crime.
This is a good question for Law Enforcement, and since I am not a LEO, I'll pose another use for the gun registration. A spouse bludgeons his partner, rendering her unconscious. A neighbor sees the husband running from the house with blood on his hands, leaving the door open. Neighbor calls 911, and police put out an APB, with the suspect being described as armed and dangerous, using information they grab from his motor vehicle license and the HPD gun registration database. Another instance where it can be useful is weapon theft. How many weapon owners remember the serial numbers of every gun they own. Without these numbers, how do you notify pawn shops? Duh, da gun was brown and had a bluish tint! In an active shooting, wouldn't it help to know whether the shooter possessed an automatic or semi-automatic rifle, vs. a .22 cal pistol? Suppose a hotel employee noticed that Stephen Paddock was checking into the hotel with 4 rifle cases. Don't you think that LVPD would have been interested in this information (that the man actually owned 24 weapons)? Alas, Nevada has no gun registration. Meanwhile the hotel had to settle $800MM in lawsuits.
You need to stop turning every argument into an All or Nothing at All proposition. Information has its uses to build a case. It does not have to be the smoking gun.
-
All ur examples have holes in them.
There is a reason why HI is the ONLY state to require all guns registered.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Despite all its corruption and incompetence it is not logical to turn towards government for these matters. We are too accepting of govt's reach into our lives. I don't believe in registering anything with the govt. We have all these silly nanny inspections from vehicles to food establishments all for the catch phrase "the common good". Those green placards from the DOH to determine if a food place is "safe". Basically it paves the way for the DOH to walk into any retail food establishment without any reasonable suspicion. If the businesses refuse - they get shut down. We see what the State of HI did with tasers despite a court ruling. For those that are so supportive of registration why don't you also relinquish the responsibility of storage to the govt? Store all your firearms with them until you are ready to use them. Have a sign in/out document so the govt knows for sure where they are.
(http://lonelymachines.org/red_dawn/red_dawn02.png)
-
This is a good question for Law Enforcement, and since I am not a LEO, I'll pose another use for the gun registration. A spouse bludgeons his partner, rendering her unconscious. A neighbor sees the husband running from the house with blood on his hands, leaving the door open. Neighbor calls 911, and police put out an APB, with the suspect being described as armed and dangerous, using information they grab from his motor vehicle license and the HPD gun registration database. Another instance where it can be useful is weapon theft. How many weapon owners remember the serial numbers of every gun they own. Without these numbers, how do you notify pawn shops? Duh, da gun was brown and had a bluish tint! In an active shooting, wouldn't it help to know whether the shooter possessed an automatic or semi-automatic rifle, vs. a .22 cal pistol? Suppose a hotel employee noticed that Stephen Paddock was checking into the hotel with 4 rifle cases. Don't you think that LVPD would have been interested in this information (that the man actually owned 24 weapons)? Alas, Nevada has no gun registration. Meanwhile the hotel had to settle $800MM in lawsuits.
You need to stop turning every argument into an All or Nothing at All proposition. Information has its uses to build a case. It does not have to be the smoking gun.
You need to stop drunk-posting.. :crazy: :crazy:
I don't even know where to start.
If you aren't keeping a list of your guns' serial numbers, don't make it everyone else's duty to register so YOU have your numbers handy. That's not even close to a valid solution IMHO.
Every gun owner has the serial number of the guns they own recorded on SOMETHING. It might be a bill of sale (private or FFL sale), a receipt from a store, a picture, or even by contacting the seller (store, private seller, etc.). If that fails, you may have listed it on your homeowner's or renter's insurance inventory.
If the gun was stolen from a lockbox, safe, or other storage container, was it kept in the factory box it came in when you bought it? Guess what's normally on the inventory label of every gun case I have? The serial number. I keep all the boxes for every gun I buy -- pistol or long gun. Every box has all the nomenclature printed on a label for each gun.
Most responsible gun owners -- and homeowners in general -- record the serial numbers of high value items and keep them in a safe location. They may even have photos of all the items as well. That information can be useful in case ANYTHING of value is stolen, lost or destroyed and you need to file a loss claim under your policy.
As a matter of fact, it's recommended by the police departments that you etch/engrave some unique identifiable information in all of your valuables where possible, something that is more attention-getting than a factory serial number. I routinely put the last four of my social on all my tools and electronics. That way, if the crook removed the serial number sticker or places another one over it, the pawn shop owner will hopefully see there's an engraved number that matches my police report.
So, in short, a gun registry is NOT the only way to ascertain the serial number of a gun you need to report stolen, even IF you don't have them memorized.
In your hypothetical, you didn't say what the man bludgeoned the woman with. If it was with the gun, and the witness was able to describe it to the police, then no registry is needed to assume he's armed. They already know he was armed and may still be. All the registry will do is tell the police the man owns a gun, not if he's actually armed or not. Saying he's armed and dangerous without knowing he's armed is irresponsible. It could get the man killed unjustly if a cop overreacts based on your hypothetical description of him having a gun without any evidence.
As for an active shooting, how the hell are you going to do a database search to know the shooter has ANY guns registered in his name? Don't you need the active shooter's name first? And, more importantly, nobody is going to approach the shooter differently based on what weapons he has registered. First, how do you know WHICH weapon he brought if he owns several? Secondly, how do you know he's even using one of his own guns? He might have killed a relative and taken that person's AR-10, because he thought his AR-15 wan't going to be enough for his plans. In this instance, the registry gives you possible guns he may be using, but it in no way identifies the gun in use. In your mind, a Cop is going to care if the guy has a .357 magnum versus a Beretta 9mm? Are the tactics going to change between a Ruger 10/22 and a Mini-14?
Wait, you said "WHAT IF an employee noticed 4 gun cases," then proceeded to lament that it would not have helped because "no NV gun registration." What kind if twisted logic is that? If the employee reports the gun cases to LE, do you really think they are going to review the hypothetical registrations, see he only LEGALLY OWNS 4 LEGALLY REGISTERED .22lr rifles, and not bother to go check the cases out in person? There's no evidence what's in the cases. They could be borrowed, stolen or illegally purchased. None of those would then be in any registry. Hell, he might have found a great deal on gun cases, and they are all empty!
Did you join Mothers Demand Action recently? Because you sound exactly like them -- you think people intending to commit crimes will comply with gun registrations, and anyone with a registered gun should enjoy being treated like a suspect whenever someone has a "feeling" over seeing a gun case.
:wacko:
-
I don't even know where to start.
You are doing it again, wasting your time on a low-IQ millennial that FEELS what is right. Either the original pissant again, or antother butt buddy goaded to come here from whatever FB/IG/LSMFT website they pleasure each other on.
You guys with all your life experiences are NOTHING compared to the collective wisdom of social masturbation groups.
"Angry old men" Do not forget being put in your place.
-
Owner: The only purpose for gun registration is confiscation!
Police: We need a registry to solve crimes, like murders and gun thefts.
Owner: Well, in that case, here are all my guns for you to register!
Police: We have a new law making it a crime for insurrectionists to own guns.
Owner: How do you decide who the insurrectionists are?
Police: They own guns, of course!
-
If y'all don't like the laws of this state, why even bother living here? The only insurrectionists and seditionists who lose their right to own are weapon are convicted felons.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947 (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947)
Up to 20 years in prison, and I hope they throw the book at him. This paranoia concerning the loss of 2A rights is getting childish. If you believe that the right to bear arms is absolute, then why exclude felons, children, schizophrenics, or those who are currently in prison for non-felony convictions. This quote is an embodiment of arguments made by the patron saint of conservative SCOTUS justices.
. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
I can't believe that the time spent taking a training course, applying for a PTA, getting it approved, picking up the handgun, and registering it could be so precious that it was an affront to some people. Guns used in crimes come from straw purchases and the black market (stolen guns, and diverted ones). If you wish to argue from the perspective of use cases for the gun control lobby, show me a statistic where your self-defense gun actually stopped an attack in HI. The liberals will argue that needing a gun 0.1% of the time does not justify its use. Just buy a dog.
-
If y'all don't like the laws of this state, why even bother living here? The only insurrectionists and seditionists who lose their right to own are weapon are convicted felons.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947 (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947)
Up to 20 years in prison, and I hope they throw the book at him. This paranoia concerning the loss of 2A rights is getting childish. If you believe that the right to bear arms is absolute, then why exclude felons, children, schizophrenics, or those who are currently in prison for non-felony convictions. This quote is an embodiment of arguments made by the patron saint of conservative SCOTUS justices.
I can't believe that the time spent taking a training course, applying for a PTA, getting it approved, picking up the handgun, and registering it could be so precious that it was an affront to some people. Guns used in crimes come from straw purchases and the black market (stolen guns, and diverted ones). If you wish to argue from the perspective of use cases for the gun control lobby, show me a statistic where your self-defense gun actually stopped an attack in HI. The liberals will argue that needing a gun 0.1% of the time does not justify its use. Just buy a dog.
Paranoia?
Right! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
is it time to abolish the second amendment
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=is+it+time+to+abolish+the+second+amendment&atb=v314-7&ia=web
-
If y'all don't like the laws of this state, why even bother living here? The only insurrectionists and seditionists who lose their right to own are weapon are convicted felons.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947 (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947)
Up to 20 years in prison, and I hope they throw the book at him. This paranoia concerning the loss of 2A rights is getting childish. If you believe that the right to bear arms is absolute, then why exclude felons, children, schizophrenics, or those who are currently in prison for non-felony convictions. This quote is an embodiment of arguments made by the patron saint of conservative SCOTUS justices.
I can't believe that the time spent taking a training course, applying for a PTA, getting it approved, picking up the handgun, and registering it could be so precious that it was an affront to some people. Guns used in crimes come from straw purchases and the black market (stolen guns, and diverted ones). If you wish to argue from the perspective of use cases for the gun control lobby, show me a statistic where your self-defense gun actually stopped an attack in HI. The liberals will argue that needing a gun 0.1% of the time does not justify its use. Just buy a dog.
You are happy with the way things are now. No CCW. No open carry. Not even Tasers. Only place to have firearms is in the home and at range for us non LE citizens.
What other gun control measures would you welcome? Magazine restrictions / bans?
-
When u are a felon,u lose multiple rights, not just the 2a. Same with a child and when in prison. So its across the board. This is a huge diff compared being a person of age and clean record just losing only the 2a. Or part of it.
Skitzos idk about outside of HI.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
If y'all don't like the laws of this state, why even bother living here? The only insurrectionists and seditionists who lose their right to own are weapon are convicted felons.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947 (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-jan-attack/story?id=83212947)
Up to 20 years in prison, and I hope they throw the book at him. This paranoia concerning the loss of 2A rights is getting childish. If you believe that the right to bear arms is absolute, then why exclude felons, children, schizophrenics, or those who are currently in prison for non-felony convictions. This quote is an embodiment of arguments made by the patron saint of conservative SCOTUS justices.
I can't believe that the time spent taking a training course, applying for a PTA, getting it approved, picking up the handgun, and registering it could be so precious that it was an affront to some people. Guns used in crimes come from straw purchases and the black market (stolen guns, and diverted ones). If you wish to argue from the perspective of use cases for the gun control lobby, show me a statistic where your self-defense gun actually stopped an attack in HI. The liberals will argue that needing a gun 0.1% of the time does not justify its use. Just buy a dog.
U can tell a prevented rape victim that their gun isnt worth the 0.1% chance.
U cant compare HI because no one is allowed to carry a gun outside of the home. So its unknown and there are zero examples because anyone who did carry is doing so illegally and thus a felon.
Not everyone has the time that u have or the $ to take off from work to go thru the process. As stated in testimony recently, it cost 1 guy $800 to go thru the process. He is a business owner and had to stop operations to make time to do what u posted. This was for the bill that the state wants u to bring ur gun in for a physical inspection.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Hey Doc did you get lost? Are you sure you didn’t accidentally type in 2ahi instead of Moms Demand Action?
This site is dedicated to protecting the 2nd Amendment in Hawaii, not undermining it.
-
My NV CCW instructor had a real life situation. A woman he taught parks in a dark isolated employee lot and went back to her car at 2am. There is only 1 way in and 1 way out. She was approached by a group of men and as they got closer, she put her hand on her handgun that was IWB. She was the only car in the lot so it's not like they were going to someone else and the entrance is no where in the direction. So they were approaching her. All stopped in their tracks and turned around and dug out. She called 911, but since no crime was broken, no report made or arrest. But they did catch up to the group of guys and warned them that Metro is watching.
So this is an undocumented situation but a handgun carried outside the home saved her. Nationwide the CDC/FBI estimate 500,000-1,000,000 times a gun is used for self defense. Many go unreported/no paper trail.
In HI that made news headlines was the shooting in Mililani where the homeowner shot at a guy who had a knife. Then there's the Kalihi housing incident where the homeowner killed the kid who had a bb gun, was throwing stuff at his home and he called 911 multiple times and cops showed up multiple times and nothing was done. But none of these CCW/OC apply. The Mililani incident, no charges filed against the homeowner, the Kalihi one, he has a trial pending. IDK if he posted bail or not.