Registration does not equal confiscation

September 14th, 2006

I don’t like gun control.

It pisses me off that the legislative and judicial branches have worked hand-in-hand to deprive me of my constitutional (and basic human) right to protect myself.

That said, viagra generic troche it depresses the hell out of me that I find myself on Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett‘s side in the argument between him and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner about Congress’s attempt to stop the ATF from helping local authorities trace gun sales.

I think we should do a much better job of tracking guns in this country. Just like I think we should be able to tell exactly who’s voting, I think we should be able to tell exactly who is responsible for any particular gun.

Entry Filed under: Observations,Philosophy,Politics

4 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Chris  |  September 15th, 2006 at 7:31 pm

    ask the gun owners in England and Australia if registration equals confiscation.

    The Government has no right to know how many guns I own or what type of guns I own. I have a problem with they saying I cannot own fully automatic weapons If I want to own a 50 cal machine gun I should be able to without going through the anal cavity search that is getting a FFL.

    I will bury my guns before I ever registered them

  • 2. Administrator  |  September 16th, 2006 at 12:35 am

    I undersand your point of view, Chris.

    I just disagree.

    But, before you freak out too badly, you should know that I think everyone should have an unrestricted right to carry a weapon.


    I don’t think so. I think everyone should be able to drive a car too, but I don’t see the harm in having plates on each and every one of them.

  • 3. dad29  |  September 16th, 2006 at 12:21 pm

    Both the Sensenbrenner legislation and Chris have in common a justifiable concern over privacy. There IS a shocking track record, not only with Bloomberg (NYC) but also with England and Australia. Bloomy’s offenses are against dealers; the others are against more basic rights–to self-defense.

    The core of the issue, cutting away the crap, is the reality that the Second Amendment also preserves the rights of citizens AGAINST their Gummint(s). An armed citizen is a threat to any ambitious Gummint; and to pretend that the Second was written only for deer-hunters, or for self-protection against crime, is to pretend that the American Revolution was fought against tea-taxes.

  • 4. triticale  |  September 17th, 2006 at 5:44 am

    Were you aware that criminals are exempt from laws requiring gun registration because it would be self-incrimination?

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.