Amen.

Let me highlight this from what I wrote above Trout.
 
Guns don't kill people, people kill people.  I guess there's a bunch of different ways to look at this, but if one wants to minimize crime with guns, keep the who commit them, in the cell longer.  But .. then again, that'll cost too.  Hell.. throw 'em in the deer pits with the roadkills. 

How many times do we hear about someone who was put in jail for weaponary, get out and do the same thing?  Well me.. I hear it all the time.  My uncle is the head of the central PA drug task force.  There is an alarming correlation between heavy drugs, stolen property, and guns.  If they get busted for drugs .. KEEP THEM off the streets.  Get that law changed!!!!  Be stricter on the people who cause the problem not what they caused the problem with!!!

I see nothing wrong with getting a gun registered but every year?  There are more effective ways to minimize crime than a law that takes away a right law-abiding citizens.  That yearly registration, fingerprinting, etc... would cost astronomically to implement.

There is some logic to both sides (one clearly more than the other) but this practially seems geared toward gun control for the purpose of gun control.  It seems very extreme, and not particularly well thought out.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.  Target the problem, not the weapon.

 
Sometimes you folks get so lost in what you are reading, that you fail to even see the point being made and that it's not anti-gun supporting comments that are being made, but merely a different perspective.  One that you seem to NOT handle very well.  Please get off your 2nd amendment kick.  You **** well know we support that.
 
There is no middle here either .. you support it or you don't.  Politics and rational explanation exist in two different worlds.

ORIGINAL: Pheasant Hunter

OK, you claim that you don't want this bill to pass, yet you claim to support gun registration. Enlighten us... what are valid reasons and a method for gun registration, in your opinion?

Here are some reasons:

1. If your gun is stolen, the serial number etc. is listed with the government so that you can recover it, if found. This could help a lot of people with guns that have been inherited, since its possible that those guns will not have a reciept etc..

2. Crimes that are commited with a registered gun may be easier to solve, due to a "paper trail" that will allow the police, etc. to identify where the gun came from. Keep in mind that not all crimes are committed with illegal firearms.

3. If all the guns in the New Orleans case were registered, those people may have had and easier time getting them back. Maybe, if the guns were registered, the people effected wouldnt need to show a reciept to get them back. Also, before you put words in my mouth, I do not agree with what happened in New Orleans.

As far as a method of registration, I dont really have a good answer at this point. I'll think about it, and post later.

BTW, whats with all the bold type?

ORIGINAL: thedrake



Here are some reasons:

1. If your gun is stolen, the serial number etc. is listed with the government so that you can recover it, if found. This could help a lot of people with guns that have been inherited, since its possible that those guns will not have a reciept etc..

2. Crimes that are commited with a registered gun may be easier to solve, due to a "paper trail" that will allow the police, etc. to identify where the gun came from. Keep in mind that not all crimes are committed with illegal firearms.

I personally disagree with both of these. IMO registration would, in these cases, lead to the arrest of the gun owner, not recovery of the stolen gun. Especially if a crime is committed with said gun. They already try to hold the gun owner responsibly if a crime is committed with his gun, this would just make it easier for them.

ORIGINAL: Pheasant Hunter

     Sorry, I know this is the Lake Erie Fishing Board, but this needs to be seen. HB 760 (http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&sessYr=2007&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0760&pn=0881) is in the Pa. House Judiciary Committee. This bill calls for MANDATORY REGISTRATION OF ALL FIREARMS IN PENNSYLVANIA.  You will pay $10 PER GUN PER YEAR!!! If you do not comply or if there is a problem with your paperwork, YOUR GUNS WILL BE CONFISCATED, and you will face fines and jail time!!!
     Representative Sam Rohrer is waging a campaign to stop this bill in committee. I have added a link to his petition on my website - http://warrenpa.ws Please sign the petition and make a difference, because once they get their foot in the door, there's no turning back.
     I am personally printing business-size cards, flyers, and paper copies of the petition and distributing them around Warren County. If anyone out there would like to help, contact me through my website, and I'll email you the files to print your own.
Thanks,
Buster

Pheasant hunter,
 
Nice job using this forum to advertise your own website. Hopefully, it will get you some new viewers, just as you intended.
 

ORIGINAL: Pheasant Hunter

ORIGINAL: thedrake

Here are some reasons:

1. If your gun is stolen, the serial number etc. is listed with the government so that you can recover it, if found. This could help a lot of people with guns that have been inherited, since its possible that those guns will not have a reciept etc..

2. Crimes that are commited with a registered gun may be easier to solve, due to a "paper trail" that will allow the police, etc. to identify where the gun came from. Keep in mind that not all crimes are committed with illegal firearms.

3. If all the guns in the New Orleans case were registered, those people may have had and easier time getting them back. Maybe, if the guns were registered, the people effected wouldnt need to show a reciept to get them back. Also, before you put words in my mouth, I do not agree with what happened in New Orleans.

As far as a method of registration, I dont really have a good answer at this point. I'll think about it, and post later.

BTW, whats with all the bold type?

1. Why do I need the government to keep track of my serial #'s, makes, models, etc.? I'm perfectly capable, as I'm sure others are, of recording this information on paper and digitally, along with pictures. I also believe that the vast majority of gun owners are perfectly capable of reporting a theft of their firearms to the police.
2. A paper trail? The majority of guns used in crimes are stolen or untraceable. Besides, if the police retrieve a gun that was abandoned at the scene of a crime, there is a very strong likelihood that there is plenty of other evidence. I agree with BlueMan89 - this information is more likely to give the police a scapegoat, rather than a legitimate suspect.
3. The guns in the New Orleans case were ILLEGALLY confiscated (actually stolen at gunpoint, in some cases) - their constitutional rights were violated by law enforcement. Everyone who participated in the confiscation (or at least those who ordered it), should go to prison, just like any other criminal.
 
The bold type is so people don't have to squint to read it.

 
So, in saying that the majority of gun crimes are committed with stolen or illegally purchased weapons, you are admitting that some are commited with legally owned guns. If only those few crimes were easier for the police to solve because of registration, isn't that a good thing?
 
I would bet there would be more than a few policemen offended by you and blueman thinking that the police are just looking for scapegoats to pin crimes on. The few policemen I know would never lose thier integrity and just look for a scapegoat. They also agree that there should be some form of registration.
 
Your arguing against me about the New Orleans situation is irrelevant. I did not at any point say that it was legal, or just. I agree it should not have happened, but if those guns were registered, shouldnt those people be able to recover them easier? I bet some of those that lost thier guns in New Orleans would have wished they were registered in some way, so they could prove ownership.
 
 
 

ORIGINAL: Pheasant Hunter

     
     This gun control bill is something I feel very strongly about, as do many others. Sadly, there are people, like you, that sit on the fence, and teeter whichever way the wind blows strongest... people that never really commit to anything, but just exist, for the sake of existing, while taking the path of least resistance.
   

 
I do not teeter the way the wind blows strongest. I have felt the way I do now, for years. I believe that sometimes the most narrow minded thing you can do is completely agree with one side without ever questioning your own views. A lot of people do this when it comes to voting. I would bet that there are many people who would vote republican in every election, just because they feel strongly about the 2nd amendment, and not take into consideration, issues in our economy, terrorism, abortion, global warming etc... This kind of ignorance cant be good for our country.
 
I'd rather be a "thinker" and question ideas, such as gun control, then make a decision on my views, rather than screaming "2nd Amendment!", each time you get into an arguement over gun control. Unfortunatley, someday you may have to come up with other reasons to keep your guns than simply shouting "2nd amendment". There are plenty of people out there who simply dont accept the 2nd amendment as a good reason to allow gun ownership. As gun ownership is challenged more and more in the future, we, as gun owners will have to convince the public with good logical reasons why we should be allowed to keep our guns. Supporting laws involving things like background checks, trigger locks, etc.. may paint a better picture of us gun owners. Going against these ideas simply makes us gun owners look foolish. So when you think I'm just sitting on the fence not agreeing with your resistance of any gun restrictions, just consider that people like me will be the ones supporting common sense ideas, and helping gun owners look better in the publics eye.
 
 
I'm done with this conversation.

In California recently they used a back door approach to gun confiscation. First they classified certain guns as assult weapons and required them to be registered. Then they extended the time you had to register them. After the extended time had expired and the guns had been registred the courts decided there should not have been an extension and everyone who registred their gun during that extended period was a felon and should have their guns taken. The last I knew the NRA and others were trying to fight the policy. 

Thanks for taking initiative Wally Cat. If everyone that agrees with us on this would just make ONE phone call to their rep in Harrisburg, we'd send a pretty strong message and probably stop this bill in a hurry.

I bet some of those that lost thier guns in New Orleans would have wished they were registered in some way, so they could prove ownership.

If they had been registered, the so-called authorities would have gotten ALL of them!

Received an update from Representative Sam Rohrer:

Dear Friend,