I'm just watching the TV show "Blindspot"
While the FBI were researching their target (some black football player) they mentioned that he had a registered gun.
Does gun registration exist in any of the USA's various States or Federally?
If not, is this a normalization of the idea that the FBI should have access to the exact type of firearm's a citizen possesses?
WTF? I thought that whole "universal background check" thing was about introducing the first registries.
What happens to the USA if every owner of a firearm has to register them with the government?
Handguns are registered through each State, with the database being available to federal law enforcement. Machine guns and other specialized stuff are federally registered.
Everything else is not registered.
The National Rifle Association lobbies our elected representatives to fight firearm registration (among other things) with the premise that registration is a kind of "permission" the government is granting to citizens. WE DON'T LIKE GOVERNMENT GIVING PERMISSION FOR THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY OURS.
Sorry...my freedom was acting up there.
Thanks Canada! Love your comedies.
>>55347193
>Handguns are registered through each State
All States, or just the most Commiefornia ones?
>>55347193
Oh, I know registration has always historically led to confiscation
always
>>55347330
Each state has their own handgun registry. All of this stuff is connected via law enforcement database, so a gun found at a crime scene in California might turn up registered to some guy in Florida. No big deal.
The Brady Bill (1980's) made sure all handguns legally sold or transferred in the US were registered. ....the legal ones. Some states are much looser about it. Here in California, if I sell my handgun to someone, I have to take it to a licensed gun dealer and he runs a background check on the guy I'm selling it to. The state collects a fee, etc. In some other states (like Alabama or Alaska) you can just hand your weapon over to someone, although you can be criminally liable for selling it to a known criminal.
>>55346779
It does but conventions and other things like them can by pass the registry
>>55347193
Holy shit is that Luna Kitsuen?
>>55347330
>>55347193
>>55347584
Whoops! I take it back. Registration is not universal in the US. My understanding of the topic was imperfect, and I retract my earlier remarks. My apologies.
It IS state-to-state though, and the NCIS has replaced the Brady Bill in terms of background checks on purchasers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state
Tv shows, and naturally people who are making shit up, have been saying that shit for years. I have many times heard wanna be bad assess talk about how they know a guy who can get " unregistered guns" and it's always some big fucking story but it used up being a mossberg from walmart.
>>55347710
>Luna Kitsuen
It's Stephanie Hayden Ford from Sons of Guns
>>55348142
I'd like to add that she was dicked down by her own father.
>>55347959
ok
We had that whole rifle registry here and it turned out that cops just assume anyone can have a gun so the registry was useless
But there was the High River gun grab.
Just a Canuckle here
>>55348382
>High River Gun Grab
Interesting, just read up on that
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/national-post-view-gun-grab-in-high-river-was-a-serious-rcmp-failure
You know, much of the time I wonder if incidents like these are little social experiments by the powers that be to see how far they can push the populace and get away with shit.
>>55348755
It's called the slippery slope for a reason
>>55346779
>Does gun registration exist in any of the USA's various States or Federally?
In some states, yes.
>If not, is this a normalization of the idea that the FBI should have access to the exact type of firearm's a citizen possesses?
Yes.
>What happens to the USA if every owner of a firearm has to register them with the government?
Civil war.
No, I'm not kidding. Most states don't require registration. That, combined with the number of firearms currently in private possession, means that the only way an actual registration could be compiled would be through utterly tyrannical measures that wouldn't get very far at all. If they tried to force the issue, the feds would get BTFO.
As an example, our state of Connecticut dictated that all owners of "assault weapons" must register their arms about two years ago. It was a miserable failure, with around 15% compliance (the majority of people just said, "lol, fuck you"), and literally nothing has happened, because the government can't make it happen without stirring up a literal rebellion. They'd have to go house to house (with what army?) and forcibly attempt to inventory weapons. It would last all of a week before they ran out of cops.
Hillary Clinton and her ilk would love to institute firearms laws much like what exist in D.C. -- firearms are incredibly restricted and owners have them at the pleasure of the government.
What she'll do once in office, is introduce a bill to do this very thing. She'll fail, and start crying about "muh childrens" and "somebuddy must do something" and Americans in blue states will eat it up. Red state Americans will seethe.
She'll then sign some executive orders and there will be taxation of 1000% (she's on the record for saying this) on ammunition. Gun stores around the country will get the San Francisco treatment (regulate them out of existence). And there will be lots of skullduggery going on to seize firearms in the name of "national emergency" and "mental health" and "terrorist threat", but not enough to violate our homes.
>>55349390
>taxation of 1000% (she's on the record for saying this) on ammunition
This would eventually be struck down by the supreme court, barring changes in the makeup.
>The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
>The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense.
Taxing a right out of reach, to many people, would seem to fall under the "prohibiting the use of arms in common use for lawful purposes" thing.
>>55349390
No wonder there's such a push to import Muslims
With enough Muslims there will be a hue and cry by too many to ignore. Government in the USA will be empowered to fight "all forms of extremism"
I'm not looking forward to the next 40 years of my life.
>>55349599
We can hope our branches of government remember their duties.
thanks /pol/ for the answers
stay cool
