Registration of all handguns.

[apocalypsehow]

31. Yes, you did move the goalposts and followed the so-moving up with more meaningless jazz:

"You just never read my original post. The police have my pistol serial numbers on file. But that isn't what you mean by "registration" is it?"

1. Yes I did. 2. That's nice. 3. Nope.

"Wow! So convincing"

You were the one made an assertion without the slightest evidence to support it, to wit: "But the auto registration argument does fall apart," and then breezed on into another subject (in an attempt to change it).

But, one more time: No, it doesn't.

"People will only comply with laws they find just or ethical. It's quite telling that you used the example you chose. It says a lot about you. I would use the example of the lunch counter sit-ins, civil non-compliance to break an unjust law. Or simply choosing to not comply with a seat arrangement. Or the fact that my Great Grandmother sold birth control by going door to door as if she was an Avon lady. Basically, a doctor would ask a woman if she wanted more children and if she said no, he'd dispatch a woman like my great grandmother to covertly sell and teach the use of birth control. If a law was passed that stated that I had to report to authorities any Hispanics that were suspected of being undocumented immigrants, I would simple not comply and ignore the law."

1. Nope: in a democracy, we comply with the laws period, or we accept the consequences of breaking them. What people do in a democratic country (small "D" for the form of government) is work to change the laws we dislike through petitioning our legislators, or supporting candidates for office that agree with our views, or speaking out. When civil disobedience is invoked to call public attention to a set of laws that may be unjust, part of the package that goes with that is sacrificing the verdict of the moment for the verdict of history. On a side note: that you would attempt to link owning an assault rifle with voting rights or desegregation efforts is simply obscene.
2. Cool story, Bro.
3. Non-responsive personal attack, and attempt at false linkage: not worth replying to.

"Most places that sell ammo don't allow guns to be carried inside, like a sports store. You're obviously not a gun owner."

1. Even if true, So what? But it's NOT true: neither Wal Mart nor any of the chain sporting goods stores I've ever seen have the "no guns" sign up prohibiting concealed carry; further, the last gun store I was in people were toting guns in and out openly for the on-duty gunsmith to look at, to offer for trade, etc. You're obviously not a gun owner. 2. Believe what you wish.

"So you intend to use registration to discourage gun ownership. That's why so many gun owners so vehemently oppose it. The base proposal of registration is just to ensure that a gun doesn't fall into criminal hands, but then it gets taken to extreme positions to price out or eliminate certain types. It would be amazing to me that a gun owner wouldn't understand that, BUT"

1. No: it would be used to keep track of all the deadly little toys floating around American society, so that when one was misused, it could be traced to it's errant owner; or to remove same from the vicinity of men who were domestic violence offenders, or, say, just convicted of a felony. See how that works? ( )
2. I don't care how many pro-NRA "enthusiasts" oppose sensible gun legislation.
3. Non-responsive nonsense.
4. Ditto.

"You're not a gun owner. The signature line gives it away. It's obvious that you are not one, so spare me the lie."

1. Believe what you wish. 2. My sig line is a dandy, and 100% spot-on to boot - that's why it invokes such rage from pro-NRA boosters. 3. See #1.

There: I believe that pretty much puts paid to the tab, as the saying goes.

All too easy.