Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong, Missouri has a law that does not allow registry.
The only state I know of that has a forced registry is Hawaii. As far as I know, here someone can "register" their guns at the Sheriff's office. It's not really a registry but something that they would use if the guns were stolen. Personally, I keep a list of my guns here at home with type and serial number written down that I would use if they were stolen. Only then would LE get a list of my firearms. But it's an option that some people use, and many transplants who don't know any better think they have to do.
When I helped my buddy out working in his gun store many newer residents would come in and buy a gun, then ask where they had to go to "register" them. The answer was there is no registration requirement. This caused deer in the headlights looks in a lot of cases. There are scads of municipalities that require registration and permitting, that fly in the face of state constitutions. The NV constitution precludes a central registry as well, and thus the conundrum they have with the new private sales BC law.
Sheesh, all sorts of people misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. Simply put (again) in order to enforce private sales BCs LE need to know who owns what. Thus, they require a central registry, which in most cases (such as here in NV) they won't be getting. Sounds like it would be the same in MO if private BCs are supposed to happen. LE would have to have a current starting point for all the guns out there as of RIGHT NOW in order for private BC requirement to be anything resembling effective. Otherwise their just ain't no way to tell when a particular gun was sold to who and by who. Or given/passed down to who in the case of guns within the family.
Again, I have no problem with the premise behind private BCs. But everyone I know would not sell or give a gun to someone they don't know VERY well and for a long time. And they won't be doing any BC when they do so. Whether the state tells they have to or not. Now, all this said (again) I hope I've made my point clear.
Yes but only to the original purchaser if the gun turns up at a crime scene. If the gun changes hands through a private sale where no paper work or records keeping are required that search will come to a dead end.
A registry is where at the point of each sale, loan or transfer the federal or state government is informed of who bought what type of weapon, and it's serial number including all of the purchasers information and is then logged into a government data base. That does not happen except in states that require certain types of firearms to be registered, typically handguns and in some states so called "assault weapons".
When I had a concealed weapons permit in New York and moved to Arizona. I surrendered my New York State permit as required by law. I did not have to surrender the handguns. The State of New York has no way of knowing that once I got out here whether I sold those guns through a private sale or kept them. Nor does the federal government. They also have no way of knowing whether I bought any guns through a private sale as only federally licensed dealers are required to keep such records.
The only state I know of that has a forced registry is Hawaii. As far as I know, here someone can "register" their guns at the Sheriff's office. It's not really a registry but something that they would use if the guns were stolen. Personally, I keep a list of my guns here at home with type and serial number written down that I would use if they were stolen. Only then would LE get a list of my firearms. But it's an option that some people use, and many transplants who don't know any better think they have to do.
When I helped my buddy out working in his gun store many newer residents would come in and buy a gun, then ask where they had to go to "register" them. The answer was there is no registration requirement. This caused deer in the headlights looks in a lot of cases. There are scads of municipalities that require registration and permitting, that fly in the face of state constitutions. The NV constitution precludes a central registry as well, and thus the conundrum they have with the new private sales BC law.
Sheesh, all sorts of people misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. Simply put (again) in order to enforce private sales BCs LE need to know who owns what. Thus, they require a central registry, which in most cases (such as here in NV) they won't be getting. Sounds like it would be the same in MO if private BCs are supposed to happen. LE would have to have a current starting point for all the guns out there as of RIGHT NOW in order for private BC requirement to be anything resembling effective. Otherwise their just ain't no way to tell when a particular gun was sold to who and by who. Or given/passed down to who in the case of guns within the family.
Again, I have no problem with the premise behind private BCs. But everyone I know would not sell or give a gun to someone they don't know VERY well and for a long time. And they won't be doing any BC when they do so. Whether the state tells they have to or not. Now, all this said (again) I hope I've made my point clear.
I trust my insurance guy and he has all my information in case of theft or more likely, fire.
The only state I know of that has a forced registry is Hawaii. As far as I know, here someone can "register" their guns at the Sheriff's office. It's not really a registry but something that they would use if the guns were stolen. Personally, I keep a list of my guns here at home with type and serial number written down that I would use if they were stolen. Only then would LE get a list of my firearms. But it's an option that some people use, and many transplants who don't know any better think they have to do.
When I helped my buddy out working in his gun store many newer residents would come in and buy a gun, then ask where they had to go to "register" them. The answer was there is no registration requirement. This caused deer in the headlights looks in a lot of cases. There are scads of municipalities that require registration and permitting, that fly in the face of state constitutions. The NV constitution precludes a central registry as well, and thus the conundrum they have with the new private sales BC law.
Sheesh, all sorts of people misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. Simply put (again) in order to enforce private sales BCs LE need to know who owns what. Thus, they require a central registry, which in most cases (such as here in NV) they won't be getting. Sounds like it would be the same in MO if private BCs are supposed to happen. LE would have to have a current starting point for all the guns out there as of RIGHT NOW in order for private BC requirement to be anything resembling effective. Otherwise their just ain't no way to tell when a particular gun was sold to who and by who. Or given/passed down to who in the case of guns within the family.
Again, I have no problem with the premise behind private BCs. But everyone I know would not sell or give a gun to someone they don't know VERY well and for a long time. And they won't be doing any BC when they do so. Whether the state tells they have to or not. Now, all this said (again) I hope I've made my point clear.
Fortunately here in Arizona we have state preemption statutes that prohibit counties and municipalities from enacting firearms laws that are more restrictive than the state's. The only exception is on the Indian reservations. We are also a Constitutional Carry state where no permits are required to carry either open or concealed. Obviously there are no registration requirements here either. Permits are optional and the handguns are not listed on the permit nor does the state require that information when applying for and obtaining a permit.
As for me I wouldn't sell a gun to anyone who did not have a valid Arizona drivers license along with an Arizona concealed weapons permit (CWP). I would then keep a personal record of who I sold that gun to. Yes there are some people that I know very well that I wouldn't have a problem selling one of my guns to. But they too have a (CWP).
Therein lies the problem of even having any form of a registry, at all. Abolish all of them.
You're not going to get any argument from me on that point. Gun registries are useless as criminals do not obtain their guns through legal channels. They're certainly not going to register them that's for sure. I doubt they're filling out Form 4473 and submitting themselves to the NICS check.
We don't have a gun problem, we have a criminal problem along with a broken criminal justice system that allows violent felons to freely roam the streets.
You're not going to get any argument from me on that point. Gun registries are useless as criminals do not obtain their guns through legal channels. They're certainly not going to register them that's for sure. I doubt they're filling out Form 4473 and submitting themselves to the NICS check.
We don't have a gun problem, we have a criminal problem along with a broken criminal justice system that allows violent felons to freely roam the streets.
And I can prove other ways to die in this country... that don't involve firearms.... just did it in the Nazi Germany can happen again thread. I expect to hear crickets from them...
One of the most important effects to letting everybody carry a gun if they want to, is deterrence. If all so-called "gun control" laws were eliminated (i.e. if the 2nd amendment were obeyed at last), making it legal for any adult to carry, most of them still wouldn't bother. But a few would. And a criminal who's thinking about robbing someone, or raping or even murdering, he'd have to think twice knowing that there are probably a few people in the crowd who have a gun and know how to use it. He'd never know which one(s) it is, and so couldn't know who to defend against until too late.
And so he may well decide not to commit his robbery or murder at all. A few truly insane criminals would still go ahead. But a large number of crimes would now never happen in the first place, and without a shot being fired.
But how would we know, exactly, how many crimes got prevented this way? The effect is, simply nothing happened. How to you quantify that, effective and beneficial though it is?
If the debate here is about banning all guns, then I can appreciate what you are explaining, but is it?
Though I know those opposed to any sort of gun control dialogue will quickly invoke the "they're just out to ban all guns" argument, but that's not really on the table in any serious way anywhere that I know of in America.
Fact is today, I don't think there is ANY debate about this, we can all own our hand guns, shot guns and all sorts of other guns that well serve the deterrence purpose you emphasize, if we really want to believe we're deterring anything. We can and do buy those weapons in America in a big way.
Whether military style weapons are necessary -- weapons I like to call WMDs (like Paddock preferred) -- are necessary for the deterrence purpose you feel strongly about is the question I think.
I think not, though I also don't think a ban on such weapons has any good chance of deterring yahoos with such weapons from doing what Paddock did. Same goes for the good guys with such weapons. They're not deterring anything either for all practical purposes. My take anyway...
That's a flimsy argument. I currently have a man stalking me (I'm female), and he has a drug possession record. The record is from a long time ago, but I happen to know that he still uses and deals drugs (reason for current dispute between us), and that has made no difference whatsoever. He's a legal gun owner.
Background checks did diddly squat, and I'm STILL in danger.
Your argument does not compute with mine.
My question about how we can know what crimes are prevented due to background checks has nothing really to do with what you are explaining. Hard enough to stay "on point" without going off the tracks...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are scads of municipalities that require registration and permitting, that fly in the face of state constitutions. The NV constitution precludes a central registry as well, and thus the conundrum they have with the new private sales BC law. 
