Gun Ownership

It isn't an infringement, and it doesn't infringe. The government currently requires permits and registrations of certain types of firearms, and courts have consistently upheld them as legal.

 

It is my contention that requiring a list of my firearms infringes upon my right to keep and bear arms because it is meddling.

Why do they need the list?
If I am a stamp collector, I am not required to give them a list of my stamps.

I need only report a profit or loss on Tax Day if I auction my stamps.
Otherwise if its just a hobby, they are meddling in my private affairs by asking for a list.

Same if I am a collector of guns.

A required list of my collection constitutes an a prior search because in order to create the list a search or inventory must be made by someone (and "to add insult to injury", I'm the one who is being required to do the search/inventory).

If they (the government) believe I am up to something criminal and they have probable cause, let them obtain a search warrant stating the probable cause for the search (and/or my arrest) and what they are looking for thereby allowing them to legally enter my premises and tear my house apart.

Even at that, I would not disclose any information written or verbal due to the right of non-disclosure to protect myself from self-incrimination (Miranda rights) until I have or am provided legal counsel when interrogated to defend my rights.

Otherwise (and again), they are simply meddling in my affairs and violating my right of privacy by requiring said list.


HankD

 

When the authorities get the sixteen year old crack dealer to register his 9mm......

 

Many use the amendment about the right to keep and bear arms. Is this amendment still in the spirit of when and what for it was written ?

 

I have no legal obligation to answer such a question and will not do so. My state already has a record of the guns I own.

 

It's what is known in legal terms as "a chilling effect".

 

Yes.

HankD

 

First, this is a real bill that has been tried before.
JohnV said it was an urban myth. No, it has just not been passed into law. The bill is real.
As to the OP, "will you answer truthfully or lie about it".....

Some said it would be un-Christian to lie about it. Guess that is why the Christian religion never flourished in Roman controlled areas.

Roman: "Hey! You there! Are you a Chrisitian, and where are the places you Christians meet, and who do you know the names of others that are Christian?"

Christian: "Well you got me. Yes I am, I cannot tell a lie, we meet under the coliseum after the janitors leave. Here, let me write down the names of the other Christians that come to our secret meetings."

 

Obviously, you are hanging out with the wrong people.

 

...........+1

 

I will not presume to tell you what he meant, but I will tell you this,
ANYONE who comes to dis-arm and try to leave me defenseless will get all my guns.....bullets first. If it is police officers, (not likely) or anyone else, what does it matter? When a person breaks into your home and tries to assault your family, does KENH say, "Oh, it's OK, you're a police officer, please rape my family and take what you want?"
The wearing of a uniform is not a deterent to my right to protect myself and my family. You can go gently into that night all you want. Just don't think that I will.

 

"Not that I am saying the government ought to ask for such information(I don't think it should), ...."
You almost got it.......let's try this.....let a government official live with you and your family for the next ten years. He/she will be in charge of you r life through every law, (in the US governments opinion, of what should be.)
Get back to us then.

 

What part of "shall not infringe", do you not understand?
So what if a court said they could?
Slavery used to be legal, according to 'courts'.
'Certain types of firearms.' Please read me the 2nd amandment and show me where there is an infringement to 'certain type of firearms'.

 

No, of course not. Living free and loving life is an out-dated way of living. Try looking up your own country's history. It lost it years ago.(SARC)

 

Thanks for the info :thumbsup:

*feeling in danger, Spear draws his gun and shoots at Nonsequitur *

 

Whether this is true or not, I will not register any guns, knives, swords, clubs, spears, pitchforks, or any other weapons.

 

For those of you who prefer facts:

Fact: The bill is not a secret amendment to the existing IRS code. It is a proposed amendment to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.

Fact: This bill has only one sponsor: the author Rep Blair Holt (IL-I). There are no co-sponsors

Fact: This is not law. It is a bill. Thousands of bill are authored and presented to every Congress. Not every bill becomes law nor has a plausible chance of becoming such.

Fact: This bill was introduced on January 26, 2009.

Fact: The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on February 9, 2009 There has been no action by the sub-committee.

Fact: The stated purpose of the bill is a response to, "on the afternoon of May 10, 2007, Blair Holt, a junior at Julian High School in Chicago, was killed on a public bus riding home from school when he used his body to shield a girl who was in the line of fire after a young man boarded the bus and started shooting. Text of H.R.45

Fact: Blair Holt's shooter was a 16 year-old who acquired the gun from a 15 year-old. Both youths are thought to be gang members. Chicago Tribune

Fact: Michael Pace, the shooter, was sentenced to 100 years for murdering Holt. Kevin Jones, 17, who supplied Pace with the .40-caliber handgun used in the shooting, was sentenced to 10 years in prison after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit murder. WGN Radio-Chicago

Fact: "From a sample of juvenile inmates in four States, Sheley and Wright found that more than 50% had stolen a gun at least once in their lives and 24% had stolen their most recently obtained handgun. They concluded that theft and burglary were the original, not always the proximate, source of many guns acquired by the juveniles. ~Dept of Justice

Fact: For a brief period, the Supreme Court held in 1968 (Haynes v. U.S., 390 U.S. 85) that felons were exempt from federal and state laws regarding registration because it violated their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. In other words, only people who were not criminals could be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm or found to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

Fact: Felons are ineligible for licensing under 19 USC 922 and the provisions of this bill.

Fact: “The law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered ... the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives.” Former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, January 2003.

​

That said: If I was required by law to register any or all of my "qualifying" firearms, I would do so.

 

Well, first of all thanks for correcting your erroneous statement. Secondly, this is a different scenario. There is no biblical prophecy saying that HankD will remain silent "as a lamb before the slaughter" over his guns.

Well let me reiterate this in case you missed it. The biblical mandate doesn't say "The Founders of the USA are the authority God has put over you" no it says the leaders in office now are those put in authority over you.

Since you're a great Constitutional Law scholar maybe you can help us with the difference between registering your firearms at the request of the government and registering your car, yourself as a driver, your dog, and all those permits for hunting, fishing, etc.

btw, that's not an a priori search and seizure case...:saint:

 

Providing a list is not the same as disarming.