- From: Bryan Heit <bjheit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:22:01 -0600
Douglas W "Popeye" Frederick wrote:
"Bryan Heit" <bjheit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:et4q91$5k3$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxLee Bell wrote:Bryan Heit wrote
Or maybe the idea that registration = confiscation is flawed.Few, if any, think that the two concepts are equal,
Grumman made that link pretty clear - "As we've been saying for years, "first comes registration, then confiscation""; that is what I was referring to. The idea that one equals the other is obviously ludicrous; I was just pointing out a real-world example of it.
You would be incorrect.
Firearms have been confiscated recently, as a result of registration, in California and New York City.
Australia underwent a severe confiscation after registration, of weapons including pump and automatic shotguns (i.e., common hunting weapons).
And there are several examples where registration has not lead to confiscation - for example the 2 in Canada (1934 hand gun registry; late 90's long-gun registry). So registration != confiscation.
Between this, and your inability to remotely describe an assault rifle, you begin to see why we don't want your type of thinking governing our civil liberties.
Yeah, must be unfortunate when the will of the people actually presides over a democracy.
- Prev by Date: Re: Score!!!
- Next by Date: Re: Score!!!
- Previous by thread: Re: Score!!!
- Next by thread: Re: Score!!!