Pelosi 'We want them registered'

Washington Times ^ | Monday, April 13, 2009 | Editorial

[Charles Martel]

There are few problems that can't be resolved with a suitable application of high explosives. :-)

Merely dislodging the problem is not sufficient, though. There should not be any doubt as to whether enough dynamite was used.

[geologist]

It is only the first beginning ... once enacted it can/will be augmented and expanded in on going ways to form the basis of confiscation of weapons.

The subtlety of bland beginnings sets the precedent of ‘the right to control’ firearms;and proceeds from there.

BAD IDEA

___________________________________________________

“Young's Literal Translation
The good man out of the good treasure of the heart doth put forth the good things, and the evil man out of the evil treasure doth put forth evil things.” Luke 6:45”

This is my idea of our dilemma. Good people behave, live, and believe in and for good things. Honest, true,principles that our nation was founded upon.

The evil man has no such scruples. Obviously.

He exploits the goodness of the good man.

MO is we bend over backward in our attempt to be Christian, and live our beliefs. Others have no compunction about taking full advantage of this truth.

We may continue to be passive ... until it is too late.

consider the following quote from Atlas Shrugged ...

““There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”

[Tailback]

Just as soon as the democrats start with gun confiscation in California, I'll be in line to register my guns.

California has already done registration and confiscation with the SKS. First they said register them, then they said turn them in.

[MHGinTN]

;^)

[blackie]

My neighbor says:

[Ladysmith]

Pelosi 'We want them registered'

Hey, BugEyes! KMA!

[kinsman redeemer]

" We don't want to take their guns away. We want them registered."

There you have it.

[philman_36]

Registration is for livestock and pets.
I'm neither.

[oldtimer]

We need to belong to the NRA if we don't already.

Barry wants a "National Police Force", and it is my opinion, that trained ACORN hippies will be used, if he can pull it off, to confiscate weapons house to house.

[He Rides A White Horse]

She’s not called Nazi Pelosi for nothing

I often think of "Nancy Lugosi", as in a opportunistic, blood sucking flying RAT.

[He Rides A White Horse]

Step 1. Registration
Step 2. Confiscation
Step 3. Increased harassment of political enemies and dissidents.

[Atom Smasher]

Well said! I am outraged that these dems are walking all over the Constitution without a second thought. I can’t believe that we have to wait this out until we can vote other people in.

Each day I wake up, I expect another Constitutional right to be trampled.

[El Gato]

"We don't want to take their guns away. We want them registered."

Perhaps HR 45 just picked up another sponsor, if not yet officially ... better check on that...nope, still no "official" co-sponsers.

[El Gato]

I just bought a gun this week. I believe it was registered. My name was taken down and the serial number for the gun, then the guy at Cabela’s called in for the background check. Isn’t that “registration”? What more does she want?

No that is not the sort of registration she is asking for. In fact the law requires the record of that background check transaction to be destroyed after the transaction is approved. The law expressly forbids the keeping of records of lists of gun owners tied to the specific guns they own. (That's at the federal level, YMMV by state and local jurisdiction).

What she wants is to remove those limitations on the background check information, and keep the records of who has what. Plus require all currently owned weapons to be registered as well.

[Kozak]

Step 1. Registration
Step 2. Confiscation

Step 3. Revolution

[El Gato]

Screw her.

No thank you.

Yuck!

[mbynack]

I’m very open-minded. I’m willing to consider any form of gun control that complies with the intent of the second amendment and has been proven to be effective in reducing gun crime. I think any reasonable person would accept this standard. So far I’ve only seen one - breath control and squeeze the trigger, don’t jerk it.

[Titan Magroyne]

The paper record remains with the FFL. Not sure what happens to these records if the FFL closes shop.
It is illegal, I believe, for the federales to keep any “instant check” records beyond a short time period. But I would be VERY surprised if they actually destroyed the records as required by law.
Thank the NRA for the Brady instant check law, which is a defacto registration system. What I've picked up from fellow FReepers in gun threads (YMMV) is that the FFL must retain the Form-4473 for 20 years, and then it may be destroyed. Should the FFL go out of business or pass away before the 20-yr hold term ends, it must be turned over to the BATFE.

I've listened to several FFLs making the calls for my record check, and the FBI is not given info on the gun right then.

[ZULU]

I was thinking along the lines of a LARGE screw - perhaps a la Vlad Tepes.

[Texas Eagle]

But, if the gun used in the commission of a crime has been stolen, the criminal can be let go and the owner of the gun can be prosecuted.

I find that very hard to believe. Do you have support for this claim?

Erie City Gun Ordinance