Sangamon
County Rifle Association
Right Reason on Second Amendment Rights
Springfield, Illinois
Right Reason on Second Amendment Rights
Springfield, Illinois
| |
Sangamon
County Rifle Association
Right Reason on Second Amendment Rights Springfield, Illinois |
|
 Reasons to Reject Gun Registration Jim Butler, President Sangamon County Rifle Association September 2007 GunNews After President Bill Clinton signed the Brady Bill into law on November 30, 1993, he said he views its passage as only the beginning of a much broader effort by his administration to seek sweeping gun control measures --- (Los Angeles Times, 12-5-93). He further ordered the Justice Department to begin studying gun licensing, registration and collection proposals (Washington Times, 12-12-93). U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno: Gun registration is not enough. I've always proposed state licensing ... with some federal standards. (Associated Press, 12-10-93, ABC's "Good Morning America" 12-10-93. U.S. Representative Major Owens: My bill ...... establishes a 6-month grace period for the turning in of handguns. [U.S. Congressional Record, 11-10-93]. Most registration laws were enacted in the post World War I period to prevent civil uprisings as had occurred in Russia. A report of "Committee on the Control of Firearms", written by the British Home Office officials in 1918 was the basis for registration in the U.K., Australia, Canada and New Zealand. They were especially afraid of what they considered the lower class including immigrants. One of the reasons given by these countries was to fight crime. New Zealand finally woke up and repealed their law in the 1980's after police acknowledged its worthlessness. In Australia it may have been thought, that if it were known what firearms each individual owned, some form of control might be exercised, and those who were guilty of criminal misuse could be readily identified. This is a fallacy, and has proven not to be the case. And the cost to the poor suffering Australian taxpayers was over $200 million annually. In Canada more the 20,000 Canadian gun-owners have publicly refused to register their firearms. Many others are silently ignoring the law. The cost of this registration scheme has skyrocketed to over 43,000% times the original cost. The original cost was estimated at 5% of all police expenditures in Canada. This registration scheme caused the ruling political party to be kicked out of office by irate Canadian people. "The gun registry as it sits right now is causing law abiding citizens to register their guns but it does nothing to take one illegal gun off the street or to increase any type of penalty for anybody that violates any part of the legislation," according to Al Koenig, President, Calgary Police Association. "We have an ongoing gun crisis, including firearms related homicides lately in Toronto, and a law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them", according to Toronto police Chief Julian Fantino. The system is so bad that five Canadian provinces (B.C. joins Manitoba , Saskatchewan, Alberta, Nova Scotia and Ontario) are refusing to prosecute firearm owners that fail to register. Proponents of gun registration say it will help solve crimes. There is registration in Hawaii, Chicago and Washington, D.C. Yet there hasn't been even a single case where the laws have been instrumental in identifying someone who has committed a crime. Would-be criminals also virtually never get licenses or register their weapons. The sad fact is that registration leads to confiscation. It happened in Canada. The handgun registration law of 1934 is the source being used to confiscate over 1/2 of the handguns in 2001. In 1996, the Australian government confiscated over 660,000 previously legal firearms from its citizens. And in California the 1989 Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act required registration. Due to changing definitions of "assault weapons", many legal firearms are now being confiscated by the California government. The 1928 German Law on Firearms and Ammunition (before the Nazis came to power) required all firearms to be registered. When Hitler came to power he used the existing lists to confiscate firearms. Millions of these disarmed people, especially Jews, were sent to their deaths in Nazi concentration camps. In 1967, New York City passed an ordinance requiring a citizen to obtain a permit to own a rifle or shotgun which would then be registered. In 1991, the city passed a ban on the private possession of some semi-automatic rifles and shotgun and "registered" owners were told those firearms had to be surrendered, rendered inoperable, or taken out of the city. Confiscation of registered firearms in Bermuda, Cuba, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica and Soviet Georgia happened as well. Registration and licensing have no effect on crime, as criminals by definition do not obey laws. Indeed, the national survey of prisoners conducted by Wright and Rossi for the Department on Justice found that 82% agreed that "gun laws affect law-abiding citizens; criminals will always be able to get guns." Further, felons are constitutionally exempt from the registration requirement. According to a U.S. Supreme Court decision, since felons are prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, forcing them to register firearms would violate the Fifth Amendment provision against self-incrimination. Ironically, only law-abiding citizens would be required to comply with registration -- citizens who have not committed crime nor have any intention of doing so. Finally, a national registration/licensing scheme would violate an individuals right to privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment and establish a basis from which gun confiscation could be implemented. The purpose of registration is to let the government know who owns firearms and what guns they possess. Historically, the ultimate outcome of registration/licensing is to exert control over people by confiscating their means of self-defense, not to reduce crime. As I See it index Return to SCRA Home Page |