Comments on: Five more questions from Tom

By: markm

markm — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:14:53 +0000

tgirsch: That’s because there isn’t a major political party that wants to take your car and your dog. But with guns… “Always” might be exaggerated, but it’s happened pretty often that a gun registration list became used to confiscate the guns later. Most notably, Hitler made sure to collect all the registered civilian weapons before he started sending people off to concentration camps. Most recently, Australia.

Now, if everyone was clear that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right as important as freedom of speech, I woudn’t worry much about registration – because neither confiscation, nor taxing guns under the guise of a “registration fee”, nor making the registration process as burdensome as registering a car is in some areas would be allowed.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:47:51 +0000

Or any of my guns, for that matter.

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:13:53 +0000

Mike:

registration always leads to confiscation, its only a matter of time

That’s odd. They haven’t taken my car yet. Or my dog…

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:02:53 +0000

When debating what is or isn’t an infringement, bear in mind that the original definition of “infringe,” and almost certainly the one meant by the Second Amendment, is a bit stronger than its more modern usage. Now, the word means “step on my toes in any way, shape or form,” i.e., if your dog trespasses on my front yard you’ve “infringed” on my rights. In 1791, it was more on the order of “destroy.” So an outright ban is clearly an infringement, as would be a tax so onerous as to have the effect of a ban. Waiting periods? Maybe if the period is something like a year.

Before somebody flames me, no, that doesn’t mean I support registration or waiting periods. I think both are bad ideas. I just don’t think either is an unconstitutional “infringement” of anything.

By: Thibodeaux

Thibodeaux — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:01:25 +0000

What is your major malfunction?

By: GORDON

GORDON — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:02:21 +0000

“TH.iboDeaux” is actually a construct we created as a thought experiment at M.I.T. back in the 90’s. He’s an amalgam of THomas Jefferson, Winston Churchill, Jethro Tull, and R. Lee Ermy. We had originally tried to throw in some L. Ron Hubbard for colour, but the system kept rejecting the data, and we gave up on that.

It’s nice to see the program still running, and fooling people.

By: Publicola

Publicola — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 04:50:29 +0000

manish,
taxing a specific activity in a manner not consistent with other activities would be objectionable. In other words taxing a Right solely to A: make money off of it or B: discourage it is not cool. So sales taxes on firearms are fine since there are sales taxes on other objects. A tax on being able to purchase a firearm (such as the NFA’s tax stamp shceme) isn’t.

Uncle,
registration can be an infringemnt. Two words: chilling effect. A registartion process can be viewed as burdensome all by itself or it can be viewed as governmental discouragement of that activity. I know a lot of people who don’t buy firearms from certain sources simply because it involves some form of gun or gun owner registration. So a reasonable argument can be made that registration is an infringement even in confiscation is not imminent. (& yes I’ll argue with you about this till a few days after you shoot me )

By: Manish

Manish — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 01:30:12 +0000

fair enough..I’ve always been under the impression that you were opposed to basic taxes on guns. Of course, as tgirsch notes, burdensome is in the eye of the beholder.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:56:42 +0000

Mike, I’m as pro gun as they get and if you don’t believe me, I’ll shoot you.

When I say I don’t oppose something, I am not wrong. That is my opinion. Registration is not an infringement. Restricting access to guns, waiting periods, taxes, approval processes, etc., are infringements.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:46:47 +0000

“I have never opposed registration nor databases. I oppose them to the extent they could lead to confiscation” You are wrong on this point — registration always leads to confiscation, its only a matter of time — what part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand?

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Tue, 22 Mar 2005 20:25:29 +0000

But one man’s “burdensome” is another man’s “no big deal.”

And for the record, Lovey never makes the list because she’s already spoken for.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:58:06 +0000

You always do that. I need to include the qualifer that taxing a right to the point where it becomes burdensome is illegal.

By: Manish

Manish — Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:54:09 +0000

And taxing a right is illegal.

Seems to happen a lot..newspapers seem to have sales taxes as does internet access. Its hugely expensive to assemble a large group of people in a public area in terms of having to pay for police, permits, etc.