Please review this section of an email from my friend: "I’m also stressed about the new gun laws that will take affect in Jan 2017 (if they don’t get locked up in Court). One of them will make it a felony to own about half my magazines, and another will require me to ‘register’ anywhere from 10-15 rifles. I don’t like the idea of ‘registration’, but that’s not what’s worrying me. It’s the cost. It could be anywhere from $25-$100 EACH. Even at $25 I wouldn’t be able to afford it. I may end up driving much of my collection to family in Utah (which I do not like the idea of for multiple reasons)." My friend is having some temporary money problems, so he is concerned about the new laws he is talking about in this email. Here is my question. He says something about having to register 10-15 of his rifles. Why? Don't you HAVE to register them when you buy them? My gun isn't registered because I inherited it, so I really don't need to register it. I guess my question is can you buy a gun without registering it? Boy am I confused. Oh, BTW, what's the deal with comment about the "magazines".
State registration makes it easier to confiscate them at a later date; the first things that dictators go after are guns and religion. The registration "fee" is nothing more than a poll tax on people exercising their Constitutional rights, it's beyond outrageous. Imagine if you had to register your computers at $100 a pop with the government, because some politicians don't like what you write with them?
Here is a similar story that doesn't seem to be getting much coverage: Hawaii: Manditory registration of all gun owners into FBI database Hawaii enacted a new gun law that requires the registration of all people who possess firearms into the FBI's national "Rap Back" database. "This will allow police to closely monitor gun owners to make sure they can legally possess firearms," according to a statement from the Hawaii governor's office. The NRA does not believe that exercising a Second Amendment privilege should gets people entered into a federal watchlist or database: - "Why are law abiding citizens being entered into a criminal database?" - "Will people who exercise free speech also be entered into a criminal database?" Full story: New Hawaii law places gun owners in database - CNN.com
The key difference is that the government can, and does, already monitor our computers without a warrant. They don't need to charge me a fee because my computer is on a network of computers. My internet service provider, first and foremost, is monitoring me and can tip of law enforcement. But even if I'm just a harmless blogger that doesn't mean a college dropout working at Booz Allen isn't reading my emails with his sophisticated software built for that purpose. We register our cars. Granted, driving is privilege and not a constitutional right. But registering those cars ensures that we have a sense of who owns it and, generally, where it can be found. Could that be used for some sort of government seizure of all cars in the future? Yeah, probably. Not one single politician has pitched an initiative to seize guns. I have heard very few stating that is their ultimate goal. Such a seizure would be a political and logistical nightmare that at least a sizable portion of our law enforcement and military community would refuse to enforce. Money grab? Absolutely. Conspiracy to take your guns? Unlikely.
Cars, carriages and horses were not used by the American rebels to revolt against the government: but the American rebels did use guns. Cars are not a potential threat against the government, but guns are. That appears to be why the rebels inserted the Second Amendment into the United States Constitution.
I still remember back when Bill Clinton was first running for the Presidency. There was a guy who called himself "Redneck for Clinton" and he would tell other rednecks "not to be scared, Clinton wasn't going to take your guns." And sure enough, he didn't. Obama Presidency? No guns taken. To date, I have not seen any overt measures to take people's guns away outright. Like you said, can you imagine the revolt that would take place? Now, as far as my friend. He is in a pickle. But the way I see it, it is a pickle of his own choosing. If you buy a firearm, it seems like you should have to register it so we can keep track of who is buying weapons like high power rifles capable of firing a LOT of ammo in a very short period of time. I told him he should sell some of his weapons since he is having money problems due to a divorce. He didn't seem to like my suggestion. Now that he is tight on money, he can't afford most of the ammo it takes to fire his arsenal of weapons. I don't get it. Is he expecting World War III or something?
Abner, I believe this changed back in 2014. My buddy inherited a WWII weapon from his Dad/Grandfather (can't remember specifically) and I remember him telling me that he did indeed have to register it after something changed for 2014. He said it was $20...He lives in San Bernardino County maybe that county law is different? I'd double check in your case. Might want to have a look here https://oag.ca.gov/firearms Also, calguns.net is a decent discussion forum about guns and they probably know the laws better than the lawmakers do. Sounds like your friend is in some weird financial situation. Cannot pay to register guns, but can afford a couple of hundred dollars to drive them to SLC. Sounds to me like he cannot afford to keep 15 rifles. Might need to downsize a bit. Hope everything turns out ok for him.
I think your friend needs to learn how to think outside the box. The solution to his problem is simple: He should put his gun collection in the car, then drive over to the local high school when the students are being dismissed and there is at least one police car on the scene. Then get out of the car with a gun in each hand and start shouting out in a foreign language (but not Spanish, which in California is not a foreign language) while waving his gun-laden hands around. He could fire a few, um, magazines into the air just to ensure that he’s noticed. His dilemma will be over quickly. (Kids, don't try this at home.) :eek1:
If it's in Georgia I'm not sure even that would trigger (see what I did there?) the response you might be going for.
And, for all those who fear "registration" consider that we've had it in New York for years. In PA a concealed carry permit is valid for any firearm you legally own. You also don't need a permit to buy and own a handgun. You only need the permit to carry it concealed. In New York you need the permit just to possess the handgun (you can just go buy a rifle). The serial number needs to be added to the permit. So for someone starting fresh that means you get a permit. Then order a gun. Then amend your permit to include the serial of the handgun you just purchased. Amendment required for each handgun thereafter. The local Sheriff knows exactly what you own. And yeah, you pay a fee for the permit and the amendment process. You also can only get a restricted ("Target" or "Hunting and Fishing") permit right out of the gate. Getting an unrestricted license is generally only possible after you take an approved gun safety course. Places like NYC make it a pain to get it even then. And yet all of these restrictions have been challenged in federal court. Contrary to the whining it doesn't infringe upon your second amendment rights. You can buy all of the rifles you want. You can bear arms to your heart's content. But if you want a specific type of gun, handguns in this case, you need to jump through some hoops. 2A doesn't say you get to have every firearm. Take solace in knowing that, if you were in fact required to participate in a well regulated militia, those weapons would be inspected regularly for safety as well and you'd be expected to be proficient on them. The last time I went to a firing range there were certainly people striving for proficiency. Many more violating mag limits to play Rambo.
Here is a similar story that doesn't seem to be getting much coverage: But conversely here is literature that seems to prohibit the permanent collection of names of gun owners in a national database: by: Andrew Napolitano The GAO reports that the the ATF is illegally collecting and storing gun owner identities in the United States. The federal government is supposed to gather that information for statistical purposes only, and they are mandated to destroy identifiable information such as names and addresses. The GAO report found that the ATF is not adhering to that policy. Congress decided that since the states regulate guns, the federal government would never be able to keep a list of gun owners. But they are. GAO report: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/678091.pdf News source 1: ATF forgot to comply with policy, accidentally creating gun owner database - Personal Liberty® News source 2: Judge Nap Blasts Obama Admin for 'Reprehensible,' 'Lawless' Stockpiling of Gun Owner Info | Fox News Insider
