Originally posted by Kochman
Quote:
@Webleymkv
I mainly agree with you. Very well thought out post.
4473 is a necessary evil... expansion of it isn't a bad thing, because, as you said, it is necessary. I would expand it to all stranger-stranger sales...
|
I said that it was a necessary evil
for FFL's, I do not feel that it would be necessary, effective, or prudent for private party sales. As I've stated before, the problem with UBC's is that they are unenforceable without registration, and even that isn't fool proof.
Let's suppose, for a moment, that UBC's were made law without registration. Now, let's further suppose that you've got two unscrupulous people who do not respect said law and wish to transfer a gun illegally, what would stop them from doing so? The only two reasons for someone to obey a law is that they either respect the law or they fear the punishment for breaking the law. There are hundreds of millions of firearms in this country and, because firearms are durable goods, the vast majority of them will still be functional for decades, if not centuries, more. So, without some sort of registration, what would prevent these two unscrupulous people from conducting their illegal transfer and simply claiming that it took place before the law was in effect?
Let's take this a step further and assume that, because UBC's are so easily skirted, that we move into full-on registration. In such a case, what would prevent an unscrupulous seller from simply reporting the gun that he sold stolen? Since an unregistered gun would already be illegal, what difference would it make to the buyer that his contraban is "double illegal?" Even if the buyer were caught with the gun and told the authorities where he got the gun, it would be a known criminal's word (afterall, he is at the very least guilty of posessing an unregistered gun) against that of someone whose guilt is unproven. Who would you believe in such a case?
Now, I should probably explain why I am so against registration. Registration opens the door for even more harassment and illegal actions against lawful gun owners that what we're already forced to put up with. A good example is what
The Journal News did to NY gun owners recently, that would have been impossible if NY did not have registration. Furthermore, if there is a centralized registry of gun owners, what would stop an overly zealous government official from conducting confiscation raids given an excuse such as a natural disaster. Think that can't happen? It already did in New Orleans during and after Hurrican Katrina in 2005. Now, would this be illegal and unconstitutional, you bet. Would the courts rule against this action after the fact, almost certainly. Would the proceeding two facts be of any comfort to the people who've had their guns confiscated when they need them most, I very much doubt it. Let's stop and remember that everything is Constitutional until the courts say otherwise. We know now that Lincoln's declaration of martial law in New York and Roosevelt's internment of Japanese-Americans were both illegal and unconstitutional, but that didn't stop them from happening.