Reply #99: Owner licensing and registering is NOT NECESSARY to disarm [View All]

[slackmaster]

Prohibited people.

And how you'd propose to put your proposal into effect without firearm-owner and owned-firearm information on record.

Simple:

When a person is convicted of a felony, becomes subject of a domestic violence RO, etc. a search warrant is issued for that person's home, place of work, vehicles, vessels, etc. Police with metal detectors search for weapons and take any they find into custody.

This would work for unregistered firearms as well as registered ones. The fact that unregistered guns exist and always will exist ensures that a police search will always be needed to actually disarm a prohibited person. It may be costly, but if gun control is to really be enforced in the USA that's exactly what is needed.

You see, Iverglas, your fantasy of firearm registration and gun owner licensing in the USA is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. The federal government does not have the constitutional authority to implement such a system, and there is nowhere near the political will or willingness in the nation as a whole to make the required changes to the Constitution to give the feds the power required to implement it. If the Democratic Party were to adopt gun owner licensing and gun registration as a platform plank we'd slip farther toward the abyss of single-party rule, which I'm fighting to avoid.

Some states might implement their own systems, but since we have open borders that's very little help nationwide. California has handgun registration and a license required to obtain a handgun. But we still have lots of unregistered handguns and unlicensed handgun owners even here.

There will always be millions of unregistered guns and unlicensed gun owners in this country no matter what one state or another does.

Fuggeddaboudit.