That's exactly what the left will say, but they're disingenuous. Oh, maybe some of them really believe it will stop at registration, but have no doubt. A good number of them really want to confiscate guns. That's their end game, and registration makes confiscation extremely easy.
Let's say you happen to be on the government's list of people who had a background check. As I understand it, this isn't simply comparing your name against a list of people who aren't authorized to buy guns. When you get a background check, they get all sorts of information from you, including what you purchased. That information just doesn't simply disappear.
So let's say one of the weapons you purchased is now illegal to own, and you're given 30 days to turn it in. They know you purchased one. If you don't own it now, they'll want to know what happened to it. Most people will comply. If you're one of the holdouts, you're going to be under even more scrutiny. Maybe the guys in black will even do a midnight raid on you.
It's far, far easier to confiscate guns in stages than to take them all at once. The left is very good at this. It's exactly how they're working the gay rights crap. It starts with tolerance, then gay marriage, then equal treatment rules, then bans on “hate speech,” etc. Gun background checks are simply the first step toward eventual confiscation.
Personally? I'm not really opposed to background checks if it stops there, but the left clearly wants far more controls on guns. That's the problem.
I'd have no objection to background checks if it were done without the government ever coming into possession of the names of those exercising their rights under the Constitution (and it could be, easily). Since it could easily be done anonymously, and they've chosen a method that's NOT anonymous, that tells me all I need to know about their intentions.
The easiest way to blow that out of the water is to just say:
“OK, you can have your registration, with the ONE caveat that ANY further sponsorship or writing of ANY further firearms regulations or laws, other than REDUCTIONS in existing restrictions, results in that/those politician[s] immediately being sentenced to death and summarily executed”.
While they say that’s all they want for any given iteration of regulation, they’re ALWAYS lying, and the fact that not one single one would sign onto the death penalty provision would prove it...
And that’s not being facetious either, you can probably replace the death penalty with 25 years in prison, or immediate loss of office and lifetime ban from political office, and they’d still balk.
“They just want to register your guns, not take them away.”
That is what was said back in 1964. In 1962, they said “We only want to register your HANDGUNS. Long guns will not be affected”.