Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Michelle Obamas warning to gun owners
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tulsamal" data-source="post: 2104128" data-attributes="member: 571"><p>Rather than a door by door search with occasional gunfire, a far more likely outcome is what happened in Canada. And I consider Canadians to be far more "pro-government" than your average Americans. (I'm married to a Canadian so I've been "involved" with them for 30 years now.) But when Canada went to a long gun registry.... surprisingly large numbers of Canadians didn't comply. Then the whole thing got super expensive. And the government was forced to admit that it wasn't working right and was being ignored by many gun owners. It was one of the factors that resulted in the Left losing control of the government and bringing the Right back.</p><p></p><p>The gov't in Canada admitted that _at best_ 50% of the long guns in Canada made it into the registry. This active refusal to comply destroyed the legitimacy of the law. Like when the national speed limit was 55 MPH but people still drove 70 and rarely got stopped.</p><p></p><p>That's what I think would happen in the US if some type of national registration actually went into law. A whole lot fewer guns would be registered than everybody thought were in the US. If 90% registered, then the people who didn't would be seen as societal outcasts and many would be prosecuted over time. But if less than 50% of the guns were registered, it would be widely seen as an unjust law and actual prosecutions would be few. Consider it to be a Ghandi or MLK type of non-violent solution. Massive non-compliance.</p><p></p><p>Gregg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tulsamal, post: 2104128, member: 571"] Rather than a door by door search with occasional gunfire, a far more likely outcome is what happened in Canada. And I consider Canadians to be far more "pro-government" than your average Americans. (I'm married to a Canadian so I've been "involved" with them for 30 years now.) But when Canada went to a long gun registry.... surprisingly large numbers of Canadians didn't comply. Then the whole thing got super expensive. And the government was forced to admit that it wasn't working right and was being ignored by many gun owners. It was one of the factors that resulted in the Left losing control of the government and bringing the Right back. The gov't in Canada admitted that _at best_ 50% of the long guns in Canada made it into the registry. This active refusal to comply destroyed the legitimacy of the law. Like when the national speed limit was 55 MPH but people still drove 70 and rarely got stopped. That's what I think would happen in the US if some type of national registration actually went into law. A whole lot fewer guns would be registered than everybody thought were in the US. If 90% registered, then the people who didn't would be seen as societal outcasts and many would be prosecuted over time. But if less than 50% of the guns were registered, it would be widely seen as an unjust law and actual prosecutions would be few. Consider it to be a Ghandi or MLK type of non-violent solution. Massive non-compliance. Gregg [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Michelle Obamas warning to gun owners
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom