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?

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?

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

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?

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?

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.

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?

My mistake. I thought you supported gun registration. I was wrong.

The only viable, logical, reasonable purpose for firearm registration is confiscation.

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."

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.

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.

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."

Wrong

Wrong

Well, in light of that evidence, I stand corrected!

 

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.