Posted on 05/24/2016 4:30:47 AM PDT by marktwain
There was a recent domestic shooting in Maryland. The presumed perpetrator was a federal law enforcement officer. He is reported to have killed his estranged wife and two other people. His wife had a protective order against him in March, and the Federal Protective Service, of which Mr. Tordil was a member, took his service firearm and seven other firearms.
This was in Maryland, which requires handguns to be registered. From the washingtonpost.com:
Sheriff’s deputies can’t be faulted for not knowing about that gun because, thanks to the national gun lobby and the cowardice of Congress, there is no federal database of who owns what guns. Only a handful of states, including Maryland, have registries of varying thoroughness. This case underscores why law enforcement should be able to know whether a person prohibited from possessing guns has surrendered all their firearms.
This is an official Washington Post editorial, not one merely written for the paper.
The fact that this federal law enforcement officer was already violating the law by not registering the Glock pistol, is not considered important.
The purpose of gun registration has always been to facilitate the confiscation of the guns at some later time. That is what Chief Constable Colin Greenwood, who first studied the purpose of British gun laws at Cambridge, determined. The registration system initiated in the 1920’s was never effective in reducing crime, and actually diverted scarce police resources.
From A Study of Armed Crime and Firearms Control in England and Wales by Colin Greenwood, page 246:
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
For them, the Washington Post statements can be revealing and instructive, especially because the Washington Post is accepted by most "progressives" as a serious source.
The caption did not come through with the picture. It is of Second Amendment supporters burning gun registration forms in New York.
A large segment of the US population thinks that confiscation is a good idea. They will work tirelessly to get there, step by step.
The only rational response to this is to oppose them at every step and at every opportunity. No matter how minor or “reasonable” the proposal, it should always be opposed because it is, inevitably, just another step along the predetermined path.
If registration ever becomes required I will go to the police station that very day and report all of my guns lost in “an unfortunate boating accident”.
Problem solved.
NY SAFE Act - massive noncompliance:
The SAFE Act also required that the estimated 1 million assault weapons in private ownership in 2013 be registered with the State Police. After the Cuomo administration stonewalled a Freedom of Information request for more than a year, an Albany judge ordered the State Police to release data on the number of weapons registered as required. They revealed that only 44,000 firearms had been registered.
Subtract from that number the firearms owned by police officers and licensed dealers (who have little way to avoid registration), and it’s clear the compliance rate for registration among average citizens is less than 4 percent. It’s hard to call a law that commands a 96 percent noncompliance rate a success
Due to its time-wasting bureaucracy, three-quarters of the state’s county sheriffs (including those elected in virtually all of the rural counties) have made clear they are not aggressively enforcing the SAFE Act, except as an “add-on” charge for other crimes, and 52 of the state’s 62 county legislatures have approved resolutions opposing the SAFE Act.
Please define what an "assault weapon" is.
LE can no longer be trusted to comply with the Constitution. Theyll do whatever their employers (the pols) tell them to do. The article conveniently omits the fact the confiscators will be LE. It is honest when is says registration will lead to confiscation.
Please define what an “assault weapon” is.
************************************
Anything that the Left/Libs/Progs deem to be “scary”.
4 percent,,,
Spread the Word!
Maybe the gun-grabbers can start in Chicago by requiring all gang members to register for a gun safety course. Then, when they show up, they can be disarmed and arrested. Law abiding citizens are already registered - we’re not the problem.
An assault weapon looks like those scary-looking thingies in the action flicks that shoot a thousand rounds without reloading and...and...it has a long clip or magazine sticking out like how many shots does it take to kill a deer and why are you hunting animals anyway that’s so cruel and assault weapons are black and you see those photos of white guys holding them up at gun shows why can’t those be shut down and they smile while their sons are holding an assault weapon that’s child abuse call CPS and...and...
Most of all an assault weapon is a gun that makes you go all crinkly-toes just looking at it and they should all be banned and if your neighbor has one call 1-800-SWAT and that’ll fix him!
(Gee, that was fun!)
I disagree with that assertion. I don't believe there are that many who feel that way. I believe that is a mock statement to propell our thoughts to create the sense that we are in the minority on this. I also believe it's as false as the "Sandy Hook" massacre.
No matter how minor or “reasonable” the proposal, it should always be opposed because it is, inevitably, just another step along the predetermined path
As my tag line depicts:
If LE is responsible for confiscation, I trust they realize what the ramifications will be?
If? If not LE then who? I doubt the military would unless the circumstances were martial law or similar. Recent events indicate LE, see NY and CT for those examples. They seem to have as much appitite for tyranny as their masters.
Which should reveal why leftists are so desperate to get it enacted.
I have a hard time believing that our boys in the military would follow any order that would “go after” kin on their homeland. In fact it would be my hope that all soldiers would tell the person that would give such an order to go screw themself.
The gun confiscators will likely be special units of law enforcement, picked and trained especially for that purpose.
That is how it is being done in California.
Remember, confiscation is far more likely to be done incrementally over generations, than all in one big swoop.
Try to do gun confiscation in a month... big, big problems.
Try to do it in 100 years, if you own the media... Crickets.
And you wil find that every one of them has never fired a gun. My wife was scared to death of them because of the negative image the gun-grabbers perpetrated. After I bought her a gun and showed her how to use it AND left a loaded gun on a table for one day (we live alone) to show her that they don't fire themselves she is no longer afraid of them. A big part of her getting over her fear was just learning how to use one.
Based upon the people I know in the military they would turn on their own if the demanded confiscation for citizens. But then again the leftists are pushing for a transgender military so that could change. I'm sure some of the ol vets might teach them a lesson or two tho...
I dont think that would be the case. When my son was in they talked about this as a ‘what if’. Many said they wouldnt but still a good number said theyd follow whatever orders were given. I suspect if they were deployed here for the purpose of maintaining control, which would morph into confiscation, there would be few dissenters. I suppose too it would depend on whether they were being shot at. That would certainly play into the eventual outcome. Bottomline is govt agents simply cant be trusted without verification be it LE or military.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.