From: gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Demo Gun Control & just who were the vigilantes in L.A.?
Date: 17 Aug 92 22:59:57 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: na
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <p59m-0j.garyd@netcom.com> garyd@netcom.com (Gary Dietz) writes:
>The Crisp-in-ator writes:
>>I think it is: Here is what happens when you legislate nationwide gun
>>registration:
>[. . .]
>>2) you have an excellent set of records to be used to confiscate
>>   weapons when Bill Clinton declares himself "President For Life"
>>   and has the backing of his "National Police Force" (the Gestapo).
>>
>>Registration has time and again been used for confiscation. Why do 

>References please. . . 

I think New York actually did this recently. If you want cites:

The following is one of the footnotes for David Kopel's paper on gun control.
It's from March, 1991 and thus out of date.

105. Registration lists facilitated gun confiscation in Greece, Ireland,
Jamaica, and Bermuda. B. Bruce-Briggs, "The Great American Gun War," _The
Public Interest_, (Fall 1976), p. 59; Kates, Why Handguns Bans Can't Work, p.
16.
     The Washington, D.C., city council considered (but did not enact) a
proposal to use registration lists to confiscate all shotguns and handguns in
the city. When reminded that the registration plan had been enacted with the
explicit promise to gun owners that it would not be used for confiscation,
the confiscation's sponsor retorted, "Well, I never promised them anything!"
"Wilson's Gun Proposal," _Washington Star-News_, February 15, 1975, p. A 12;
Lawrence Francis, "Washington Report," Guns & Ammo, December 1976, p. 86.
     The Evanston, Illinois, police department also attempted to use state
registration lists to enforce a gun ban. Paul Blackman, "Civil Liberties and
Gun-Law Enforcement: Some Implications of Expanding the Power of the Police
to Enforce a 'Liberal' Victimless Crime," Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Cincinnati, 1984, p. 14. In
1989, the Illinois Legislature considered a proposal to confiscate
semi-automatics, using the existing gun registration forms to find out where
to round up the guns.
     When Illinois Firearms Owners Identification Cards were first issued,
persons with a felony conviction were eligible to possess a firearm if the
conviction was more than 5 years in the past. Later, the Illinois legislature
rectroactively changed the bar date to 20 years. Registered owners who had a
felony conviction
more than 5 years old and less than 20 had their guns confiscated. Since
there are always proposals to expand the class of prohibited persons (such as
barring all persons with even single misdemeanor drug or violent offense,
no matter how long ago), and always proposals to confiscate various
lawfully-acquired types of weapons, many gun-owners are leery of being placed
on any kind of government list -- even if they are in full compliance with
the (current) law.
     For more on registration, see note 52 and accompanying text.

>>we need to register guns? Do we want to collect taxes on them?

>Great idea!

>>purpose is served that is in our interest by registering all guns?
>>What is wrong with registering criminals instead? How about registering
>>Liberals? How about registering Socialists?

>Actually, I am.  On election day, go to Palo Alto and look on the door
>of the woman's auxillary.  My name is clearly posted on the list on the door
>as a democrat.

>Nobody has come for me yet.  :-)

*yet* is a good qualifier there.

>Richard,

>Did the people who put down the coup in the ex-Soviet Union have a lot of 
>guns?  If they had, I think that the nervous and hungry army would have
>done some shooting, instead of foloowing their consciences.

Ooooh, beautiful imagery there. Righteous Soviet hero stopping waves of
enemy troops with a wave of his magic wand.

Gee, if I remember correctly that was a *tank* Boris Yeltsin was
standing up on top of. Do you suppose the fact that a big chunk of
the military was at least tacitly on their side had anything to do
with the low body count of this coup? This wasn't a case of a few guys
with great ideas and empty hands. They got at least some of the military
on their side in defensive positions.  

>Without giving away my stance on "gun control" (we do know how you
>like to generalize, Richard), think about the following scenario.
>Martial Bill declares himself president for life.  He orders army
>into Cupertino and says shoot to kill.
>What army will listen to those orders?

It's quite common for oppressive governments to take a unit from a
distant part of the country and order them in. Even in the same
city though, I know a few National Guardsmen who were just itching
to be called up and bash some heads in when the Rodney King riots
broke out. Pretty scary huh?

-- 
The War on Drugs is just part of the War on the US Constitution. 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc