Gun-control debate heats up

[WhiteFeather]

http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/234644

Gun-control debate heats up
State and federal proposals for expanded registration are decried by state representative from Peach Bottom.

It's a tough time to be a gun owner in the United States.

Everywhere you look these days, it seems there is some new gun-control measure being proposed by the state or federal government.

Last month, state Rep. Angel Cruz of Philadelphia introduced House Bill 375, which would require Pennsylvania gun owners to register every gun they own, every year at a cost of $10 per gun.

Gun owners would have to be fingerprinted and photographed and that information would be held by the Pennsylvania State Police.

The bill would make it a crime not to report to state police the theft or loss of any gun within 48 hours.

It's the exact same bill Cruz introduced two years ago as House Bill 760, which ultimately died in the House.

"Apparently, Representative Cruz feels he might find more support this time around," said state Rep. Bryan Cutler of Peach Bottom, who is an avid hunter and gun enthusiast.

Cruz and his fellow Democrats have the majority in the state House, but not the Senate.

When he was pushing House Bill 760, Cruz said he had nothing against people owning guns, he just felt the state should know where those guns are every year.

His feelings about House Bill 375 are the same, according to his Philadelphia office manager, Joe Evangelista.

Similar to House Bill 375, U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois in January introduced Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009.

A junior at Julian High School in Chicago, Blair Holt was killed on a public bus May 10, 2007, while 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.

Rush's proposed act would set up a national gun registry maintained by the U.S. Attorney General's office.

Anyone who wants to own any handgun and/or any semiautomatic firearm with a detachable ammunition magazine would have to first obtain a license from the attorney general.

And in order to obtain that license, gun owners would have to be fingerprinted and photographed and pass a written examination pertaining to the safe storage and handling of firearms; the use of firearms in the home and the risks associated with such use; the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including federal, state and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms; and "any other subjects as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate," the proposed act states.

Again, it would be illegal not to report to police the theft or loss of any licensed gun.

Less than two weeks ago, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Obama administration is considering reinstating the defunct assault weapons ban.

Former President Clinton imposed the decade-long ban in 1994, which outlawed the sale of 19 specific semiautomatic weapons and ammunition clips that held more than 10 rounds.

The ban expired in 2004, when Congress failed to renew it.

There are other gun-control measures are on the radar, but I think you get the picture.



• • •

The recent flurry of gun-control activity is nothing more than unconstitutional gun-grabbing legislation at its finest, according to Cutler.

And if the government is given an inch in this arena, he said, the citizenry soon will be totally disarmed.

Lancaster Mayor Rick Gray, who is an outspoken supporter of some gun control, thinks otherwise.

He sees proposals that seek to take a "common-sense" approach to trying to stem the growing tide of gun violence in the country, he said.

The government doesn't want all of our guns, Gray said.

"Nobody's talking about taking guns away from hunters and trap shooters," he said. "I have a lot of friends who are into that and I have no problem with it."

The question is, Gray said, whether citizens need to have AR-15s fitted with 100-round drum magazines loaded with armor-piercing bullets.

And gun registration is the government's way to block the illegal sale of guns by holding people accountable for the weapons they own.

"I have to register my motorcycle and buy a license for it," Gray said. "Why shouldn't you have to do that with your guns?"

But, unlike owning a motorcycle, the right to keep firearms is specifically guaranteed within the U.S. Constitution, Cutler said.

"We don't need to license constitutional freedoms," he said.

Cutler sees gun registration as the first step toward gun confiscation.

"First they find out where all the guns are and then they take them away," he said.

And as for empowering the government to decide which weapons are banned, he asked what's to prevent the government from expanding its list as time goes by.

The AR-15 is a semiautomatic rifle that has a detachable ammunition magazine. And when you see one, there's no mistaking that it's a military-style weapon.

But the Remington 750 Woodsmaster looks like any hunting rifle on the market, yet it also is a semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine.

Might it one day be added to a list of banned weapons?

Gray warned that gun enthusiasts might be hurting themselves by taking the "don't-give-an-inch" position.

"If you do that, the opposition is going to build on the other side and eventually you're going to be outnumbered," he said. "I think reasonable people should be able to sit down and come up with something that works for both sides."

But according to Cutler, any compromise is an infringement of a basic freedom guaranteed in the United States since its beginnings.

"I don't think our founding fathers ever intended us to be unarmed," he said.

If some of these proposed bills listed in article bother you, spend some time looking at the Law & Politics sections of PAFOA and get personally involved in the common cause of protecting your firearm rights for yourself, your children and grand children sake.

Also consider coming to harrisburg on April 21 to attend a pro-second amendment rally and then go talk to legislators mentioned in article.

IF YOU won't fight to keep your rights, WHO WILL?

[mpi]

there is no such thing Agun violence!

[Spishack357]

WTF, they're trying to disarm us before they announce their next big change for America. Fuck these liberals, I'm ready to take back our Country at the drop of a hat.

[mauser]

[snip]

"I have to register my motorcycle and buy a license for it," Gray said. "Why shouldn't you have to do that with your guns?"

[/snip]

He doesn't have to register his motorcycle, or have a license to ride it for that matter.
He could have a large collection of motorcycles and not one of them has to be registered as long as he doesn't ride them on public roads or public land.
He can ride on private property (with the property owner's permission) all he wants with no need to register.
How many gun owners/collectors keep and shoot their guns on private property?
As far as transport, I take my guns from home to shoot on private property in my car just like he could transport an unregistered motorcycle to ride on private property in a truck or trailer.

[GunLawyer001]

The government doesn't want all of our guns, Gray said. "Nobody's talking about taking guns away from hunters and trap shooters," he said. "I have a lot of friends who are into that and I have no problem with it."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.): on CBS` "60 Minutes"-- "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it."

[JoeWilliams]

An interesting tidbit about gun registration. The courts have held that criminals cannot be compelled to register their guns. It violates their rights against self incrimination.

Therefore, gun registration is most certainly not intended as a crime control measure. It's only other purpose can be confiscation, as has happened in EVERY place with gun registration.

[camper]

An interesting tidbit about gun registration. The courts have held that criminals cannot be compelled to register their guns. It violates their rights against self incrimination.

Then don't register them, and you become a criminal--and are therefore exempt from registering anything at all, due to the potential of self incrimination and will be protected from the law.

I can't imagine this will pass. I hope and pray this doesn't pass. I think Gray is a fool if he thinks that the gulf is getting wider between the pro & anti gun crowd. Actually, I think the gulf IS but what people like Gray don't realize is that the crowd on the pro side is getting larger while the anti side isn't.

camper

[Kimba]

Then don't register them, and you become a criminal--and are therefore exempt from registering anything at all, due to the potential of self incrimination and will be protected from the law.

I can't imagine this will pass. I hope and pray this doesn't pass. I think Gray is a fool if he thinks that the gulf is getting wider between the pro & anti gun crowd. Actually, I think the gulf IS but what people like Gray don't realize is that the crowd on the pro side is getting larger while the anti side isn't.

camper

Wow, talk about a catch 22! This makes my head spin.

[GunLawyer001]

An interesting tidbit about gun registration. The courts have held that criminals cannot be compelled to register their guns. It violates their rights against self incrimination.

Therefore, gun registration is most certainly not intended as a crime control measure. It's only other purpose can be confiscation, as has happened in EVERY place with gun registration.

Yes, that was Haynes v. U.S. (1968), but Congress fixed it by disallowing use of the registration info to prosecute prohibited persons in possession:

§ 5848. Restrictive use of information
(a) General rule
No information or evidence obtained from an application, registration, or records required to be submitted or retained by a natural person in order to comply with any provision of this chapter or regulations issued thereunder, shall, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, be used, directly or indirectly, as evidence against that person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration, or the compiling of the records containing the information or evidence.
(b) Furnishing false information
Subsection (a) of this section shall not preclude the use of any such information or evidence in a prosecution or other action under any applicable provision of law with respect to the furnishing of false information.

[JoeWilliams]

Yes, that was Haynes v. U.S. (1968), but Congress fixed it by disallowing use of the registration info to prosecute prohibited persons in possession:

§ 5848. Restrictive use of information
(a) General rule
No information or evidence obtained from an application, registration, or records required to be submitted or retained by a natural person in order to comply with any provision of this chapter or regulations issued thereunder, shall, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, be used, directly or indirectly, as evidence against that person in a criminal proceeding with respect to a violation of law occurring prior to or concurrently with the filing of the application or registration, or the compiling of the records containing the information or evidence.
(b) Furnishing false information
Subsection (a) of this section shall not preclude the use of any such information or evidence in a prosecution or other action under any applicable provision of law with respect to the furnishing of false information.

I wasn't aware Congress had "fixed" the problem, but now I have another question:

From what I just read, criminals with guns can't be prosecuted for registering their guns, and the registration information cannot be used against them. Which causes me to wonder what the point of registration is if we are back to cops can't use registration information to go get a bad guy who's registered their gun? Doesn't that kind of leave us back where we started, namely gun registration only affecting good guys?

Am I reading it wrong? Can the cops use registration information to bust a bad guy?