You assume correctly. This has already happened in a couple US states, and AUstralia, for example.I assume your gripe with registration is the chance that in the future a government may use it to confiscate your weapons, right?
Criminals won't register their guns. They won't leave their guns at a crime scene, either.If we put that reason aside for a moment, what else? I don't see it being "totally useless", unless the law isn't being enforced properly.
What reason would you have against it if you're planning on following the law?
Are you disputing the accuracy of those figures? Or just attempting another logical fallacy by attacking the messenger and ignoring their argument?Yeah you can always rely on the NRA for solid bias
Congratulations, you can read and understand English.So 25% of violent crime does involve guns then .
That, and the fact that the amount of actual (ie not those you discuseed, but muggings and the like) crimes with guns have increased.Yep since possesion of an unlicensed gun is a crime with firearms , possesion of a relica weapon is a crime with firearms , incorrest storage of ammunition is a gun crime , having the wrong type of gun cabinet is crime with firearms .
Do you remember the recent Metropolitan police swoop that added over 800 gun crimes to the figures ? all for one individual arms dealer , and mainly over storage and paperwork "gun crimes"
Um, once again I don't think that is true nationally, though variation will occur depending on how safe people are.CR, I am guilty of extremely poor writing. What I meant to express was that the likelihood of a gun being used in self defense is lower than the likelihood of it being used by a family member in an accidental discharge. You would never know it from my sloppy phrasing, but that's the idea I was going for. My bad.
CR
Bookmarks