Federal Firearms Registry and 4473's

[ConstitutionCowboy]

That's all well and good, but technically registration doesn't equal infringement...or does it?
Just because they desire to register something...does that infringe upon your right to keep and bear it?
If so, how?
We do have voter registration...


Looking at the zillions of gun laws already on the books, I'm not convinced they are.
Of course, I've been known to be wrong....

Registration comes between you and your arms. The back door registration via the 4473s is no different than above the table, in your face registration. You had to fill out the 4473 to buy your gun = infringement. Above the table, in your face registration = infringement. You couldn't buy your gun without filling out the 4473. The 4473 came between you and your gun same as a requirement to register your arms would do. If you didn't register them under some law, you'd lose them under that law. If it comes between you and your arms - no matter how seemingly benign, innocuous, and stealthy - it's an infringement, therefore, unconstitutional.

Voter registration is not unconstitutional. Voting is a privilege. In order to vote you must meet certain requirements. Voter registration is not prohibited in the Constitution. Infringing upon our RKBA is prohibited in the Constitution.

Woody

 

[J.P.]

Registration comes between you and your arms. The back door registration via the 4473s is no different than above the table, in your face registration. You had to fill out the 4473 to buy your gun = infringement. Above the table, in your face registration = infringement. You couldn't buy your gun without filling out the 4473. The 4473 came between you and your gun same as a requirement to register your arms would do. If you didn't register them under some law, you'd lose them under that law. If it comes between you and your arms - no matter how seemingly benign, innocuous, and stealthy - it's an infringement, therefore, unconstitutional.

Voter registration is not unconstitutional. Voting is a privilege. In order to vote you must meet certain requirements. Voter registration is not prohibited in the Constitution. Infringing upon our RKBA is prohibited in the Constitution.

Woody

But I didn't fill out a 4473 to buy my gun.

I understand what you are saying, I was lookingat it from a different angle tho'...
The government simply having the info doesn't infringe on your rights.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

The government simply having the info doesn't infringe on your rights.

Government had to infringe your right to get the info in the first place. Government can't get it without infringing. The fact that government has the information is incontrovertible evidence that government infringed your right. If you murdered someone yesterday, you were guilty of murder yesterday. Just because you didn't murder today doesn't say you are not guilty of murder today.

Woody

 

[MLR]

I agree,but(there's always a but)the way government has interpeted the interstate commerce clause(incorrectly I believe)they believe they do have the autority to do just about anything.Damn the consititution.

The Supreme Court ruled that a bushel of wheat grown by a farmer and used by same farmer in his own State was interstate commerce. Not because it actually was used in interstate commerce, but because of the idea that it could be.

Michael

 

[mons meg]

The Supreme Court ruled that a bushel of wheat grown by a farmer and used by same farmer in his own State was interstate commerce. Not because it actually was used in interstate commerce, but because of the idea that it could be.

A spectacular example in liberal judicial activism post New-Deal. Doesn't make it right.

 

[purplehaze]

In the strictest since, the goverment, requireing a person to submit a form or go through a background check and the sale being subject to the results is infringement.
However, over time and sometimes for popular causes the constitution is eroded. For instance the ban on automatic weapons is one of the more flaggrant debasing of our second amendment right. At the time the goverment used the turmoil of the time with a sensible argument on its face to forever restrict our right to own automatic firearms.
The background check is the sameway. The argument being that they dont want felons to own firearms and no one wants felons to own firearms. Sure seems like a common sense no brainer, of course felons shouldnt own firearms. Solution, have everyone in the nation that buys firearms subject to a background check.
Does that seem like a reasonable solution? Is there a less intrusive solution to this riddle?

No, it is perfectly official

What's the big deal about gun registration anyway?
I'm not saying I'm in favor of it, but what difference does it really make? It doesn't seem to violate the Constitution in any way.....



Weleetka.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Does that seem like a reasonable solution?

No.

Is there a less intrusive solution to this riddle?

Yes. Keep those felons who can't be trusted with arms locked up until trustworthy, and execute those who'll never be trustworthy.

Petty felons should be able to keep and bear arms after doing their time. They are the non-violent felons and those felons who never used a weapon in the commission of their crime(s). Martha Stewart is a good example.

Violent felons should never see the light of day until it can be proven they are no longer a threat and can be trusted with arms.

Woody

 

[FAL guy]

4473s are not destroyed after 10 years. They are kept for the duration of the business. If the FFL goes out of business the FFL holder is required to send the 4473s to the ATF...not the AG.

 

[J.P.]

Solution, have everyone in the nation that buys firearms subject to a background check.
Does that seem like a reasonable solution? Is there a less intrusive solution to this riddle?

Background check to exercise a right?

 

[MLR]

Does anyone really think the 'government' is going to go door-to-door disarming citizens?

No I believe it will be like when the U.S. Government banned the private ownership of gold. The law abiding citizens will turn them in. After all most people voluntarily send in their tax payments don't they? This will take care of the majority of the arms. Anyone not turning theirs in would be felons and no longer be able to own any weapons legally.

They would probably start with a list of prohibited arms first. Things that you don't really need, such as firearms with them awful barrel shrouds on them.

Michael