I think that they will probably start a database of all gun transactions. The next step is there will be a sales tax that will have to be paid. Then the Federal Government will find some way to add another tax.
suppose you had a gun you had owned for several years. You sold it to your neighbour. You did not go to the FFL. How could the Feds monitor that a law had been broken when they didn't even know you HAD the gun in the first place?
The feds need to effectively monitor if a law is being enforced or not.
If Congress passes a UBC law, Obama & Holder will, IMHO, institute a database that will track who owns what, because otherwise the BATFE will never even KNOW if a law was violated.
So let me ask you a question. Are you in favor of UBC?? Because the way that you keep defending it sounds like you do. It isn't hard to see how the UBC would lead to confiscation. Its not rocket science.
They will just make it illegal to possess an unregistered firearm, then have surprise checks at gun ranges.
Or if you ever use your unregistered gun in self defense you're in big trouble.
Making criminals of us all.
Or if you ever use your unregistered gun in self defense you're in big trouble.
Making criminals of us all.
And there it is. Groupthink
You're either with us or against us mentality. No questions are permitted.
I asked a question and challenged the assumption that UBC necessarily demands registration in order to be implemented.
I can see that's not acceptable here. You have to go along with the herd, err I mean crowd.
No, I don't favor UBC but I also don't believe that Coburn and the NRA would be exploring UBC that includes registration of any kind.
As a matter of fact, I'm confident that Coburn and the NRA would only go along with a UBC law that specifically forbids registration of any kind in the text of the law.
What you are all arguing against is registration, not UBC.
You are going to need to make that clear in the upcoming debates over the bill because as long as the debate is about UBC the opposition will portray you as "protecting felons and mental incompetents ability to buy guns". And THAT is a persuasive argument to many.
UBC is the only proposed change in law that has any chance of being passed as best as I can tell.
Your argument needs to be coherent and logical if you intend to defeat it.
If I was a legislator who was on the fence about UBC, none of you would have convinced me yet.
Not being a lawyer or familiar with the machinations of the Byzantine maze we call the Law and the Federal Government, I am skeptical that a law specifically forbidding registration will effectively prevent the prying eyes of future power hungry officials from accessing the database. Why do you place so much trust in the system to limit its own power? This goes against human nature.
You are probably correct that representatives will not like to hear and will not be swayed by arguments against UBC legislation. But this is a flaw in them and not the argument.
UBC will not require registration immediately. As others pointed, they know it is a failure for enforcement. So, once some shootings are blamed on illegal face to face sales, they will come out and say they can not enforce it without knowing where all the guns are and who as them. This is not an immediate plan, but something they are going to do over time. It is a calculated plan. If they spring it all at one time, they know armed resistance is imminent. But by doing it one small piece at a time, they can continue to gain support for increasing limitations on firearms every time a major headline making shooting occurs. Individually, each small piece may seem innocent. But put it together and our 2a freedoms are wiped out.
Let me see if I can explain this in simple terms.
Let's say that first enough lawmakers and citizens, including "gun people" feel that UBC on private sales would be a good thing, or at least no different than a BC through a FFL.
Then laws are passed requiring a BC for every firearm sale, including private sales, even on guns that we have had for decades, and there are no records of who owns those guns, even existing. That means every gun in America.
So as always, there will be those that circumvent the law, by selling guns FTF without the BC, because there is no record of ownership or anyway to trace the sale of an unregistered gun. Essentially the law is unenforceable for those who are willing to bypass it.
So, logically the next step is to require that all guns in the U. S. are registered so that the UBC law on private sales between you and your friends, neighbors, family, and anyone else you decide to sell a gun to, has some way of being enforced.
The only way to enforce the UBC law, is to know of, and have a record of, every gun that exists in the U.S..
You are correct in saying that no one at this time is pushing for registration with the UBC laws proposed, mostly because that would never get off the ground, but that is the next step in being able to actually make the law work.
That is why some refer to the "erosion" of our rights. They are taken a piece at a time so that most of the sheeple won't notice, and the next thing you know, another right is gone!
Get it yet?
I would like to ask a question to all ffl people out there.If regestation was law could the feds come to your store and find out all the people you sold guns too ?
In order for a universal background check to have any merit you must track what is being transferred. Simply stated, the government MUST track every gun if they wish to insist that every sale have a background check. Otherwise there is no way to enforce who owns what.
Once they have that database of information, confiscation becomes easier because they know exactly who owns what.
Similar threads
