Buying a car does NOT require it to be registered. Driving it on the State’s highways requires it. Homes are NOT registered; properties are recorded, to protect owner’s claims of title.

So you’ve started with a false premise. Let’s think this through - just what would be the goal of registration - what do you hope to accomplish?

I can see no purpose to registering all firearms, even assuming it can be done (it’s can’t, of course; it would be the most ignored law in the nation).Unless, of course, confiscation is the ultimate goal. And I suspect that is the ultimate goal, of course. No one will SAY it, but . . . . history shows otherwise.

There is nothing in the Tiahrt amendment that prohibits tracing firearms data for a bona fide criminal investigation.

For those who want to peruse gun purchase records for any other reason (like a Bloomberg witch hunt), that is not allowed per both the Tiahrt amendment AND the 39 year-old Gun Control Act of 1968.

1)The Tiahrt amendment. (Duh!)http://www.house.gov/tiahrt/communications/press_releases/2007/Tiahrt_gun_amd/TIAHRT_amendment_2.pdf

2)The Gun Control Act of 1968http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/gca.htm

As for the guns sold legally, how do you find the 200 million guns scattered across all 50 states?

The government can’t find 600,000 illegal immigrant fugitives in this country.

The government doesn’t prosecute the 1.4 million who were denied by a background check when attempting to illegally by a gun.

The government can’t or won’t find the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants.

So, Chas, how do you suppose the government can find 200 million guns in order to ensure they are registered?

Gun Registration = Gun Confiscation.

Any gun registration law WILL BE IGNORED. And if the government attempts to enforce it, there will be a sight in this country not seen since 1865.

Register every gun….

Not much you can do if they can’t read.

1.4 million denied by the instant background check. Even when the government has the names and addresses of 1.4 million felons, the government chooses not to enforce the law.

Instead, nuts like Bloomberg dream up new schemes and new laws that will catch not one criminal, but it will bankrupt several gun dealers and gun manufacturers - and that is his true goal.

The government cannot regulate and control the private sale of guns, knives, used clothes, or garage sale items, and why should it?

Bloombergs approach is by default gun registration for anyone who legally buys a gun.

Bloomberg sent several Private Investigators to several states, including Southern states, to try and get gun dealers to sell them guns illegally. You can look it up on the Internet.

There are several State Attorneys that want his hide stretched out on a fence.

So what do YOU all propose to do about “rogue” gun dealers? Or, once again, do you even acknowledge there is such a thing?

And heckie?

1)Investigate the dealer either covertly or openly. They can do undercover “straw” buys in a blatant manner to see if he’s knowingly making straw sales. They can confront him openly and threaten criminal charges if the evidence warrants it. Either way they can easily stop it.

2)Run an investigation to trace the gun running chain and put away the real criminals.”

And what if the “gun running chain” simply moves to another state? If state and local lec cant share info, what do you propose to do about that?

“Bloomberg is a power freak who isnt afraid to break the law if HE thinks that the ends justify the means.”

Heckler, please show me where Bloomberg is advocating breaking the law or saying that “the end justifies the means”, whatever that means.

You seem not to be able to do either. Am I left to assume that no matter what, NO gun dealer is rogue and therefor NO gun dealer should be held accountable to the rule of law?

‘Cause it sure sounds that way.

It is a felony for someone who is not legally able to buy a firearm (eg. previously convicted felon)to attempt to buy a firearm.

So, if an ex-con goes into a gun store and tries to buy a firearm, fails the background check, there should be BATF and FBI all over this guy to prosecute him or her for committing a felony.

Rarely happens folks.

Still, some just want to pass more gun laws. (and not enforce them either)

There is practically no enforcement of existing gun laws.

• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,Firearm and Explosives’ (ATF) field offices investigated 9,575 National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) denials that were referred by the FBI in 2005.• In 2005 agencies reported 1,400arrests of persons denied a firearm or a permit.• In 2005 U.S. attorney officesaccepted for prosecution 135 NICSdenial cases investigated by ATF.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/bcft05.pdf

He did break the law and should be in jail and pay a fine, but gun laws simply are not enforced.

Now, if the 20,000 existing gun laws would be enforced, crime would be so low no one would even think to ask for a new gun law.

Anyone know how many Instant Background check denials there are? Anyone know how many of those people who illegally tried to buy a firearm were prosecuted?

As it has been said before, Bloomberg is trying to skirt the second amendment.

He needs to be prosecuted Federally for sending private investigators across state lines to purchase guns illegally in his “sting” operation.

Please explain to me how Bloomberg’s approach will identify a rogue gun dealer?

Answer: It won’t.

Bloomberg simply wants to shut down the gun industry thru hundreds of lawsuits against gun dealers and manufacturers.

Bloombergs claim of being able to find a rogue gun dealer thru digging into every gun sale record is a lie, used to disguise his true intent.

Back to my lady friend to do some more chirping!

Remember all the states since Florida began the wave of states implementing “shall-issue” concealeed carry laws, have produced a harmonic response from the police chief organizations right there with the dishonest media and gun-grabber shrieks that there will be blood running in the streets. 20 years later and they’re still doing it. Now that colleges are considering allowing licensed concealed carriers to carry on campus, the police chiefs have rejoined the chorus about all the problems that will bring. How can anyone in what resembles a right mind believe that the system at VT is the way to go — or to continue?

Look at the source.

Their answer?

(crickets chirping)

If that is so, then all 535 members of Congress, each and every state legislator, every governor, all presidents, hell, EVERY elected official or anyone who ever ran for office has been bribed.

Wanna reign in the definition just a LITTLE bit?”

No, not at all. No congressman should be taking bribes. Public financing of campaigns will clear the congress of corrupt corporation and special interest corruption. They can spend their money on issue campaigns like churches can but no money will go directly to the candidates.

How did America ever change vehicles? Manufactures stopped building them. Parts become problematic, more expensive to fix.

If the Fed government said manufactures can only create 6 shot capacity handguns, they better listen.

Federal Firearms…the Federal means gov is in control.

One day we’ll get a gov who takes on the gun industry.

Since handguns are now the biggest sales of weapons, fix them to have less shots seems reasonable.

Ammunition for today’s guns can be stopped.

New handguns designed would have less shots. Different kind of ammo.

Future criminals will be have lower capacity handgun. Not less powerful, just less shots.

The goal is not get into public shootouts.

Make fun, whatever, its crazy to allow all the types of guns sold today and we’re surprised at the street carnage.

6 shots in handguns, clips and revolvers is enough.

*No, it isn’t.

I want gang members and criminals to have less shots.

*I want gang members and criminals to have 0 shots, but we don’t always get what we want.

So the gun you purchase, criminals abuse. Who should change first?

*The criminals.

You claim to be accurate, target shooting with guns helps, why not help inaccurate shooters to have less shots.

*Inaccurate shooters need more shots.

Your Right to weapons are not infringed. Society has less shots fired in neighborhoods. At least the shooters will reload, or drop one gun and pick up another. A pause will happen.

*Read above - criminals are banned from having guns now. By having a gun, they are already breaking the law. You think by passing a new law limiting gun capacity that the criminals will follow that law?

If gangs had less shots in guns and your attacked by them, training should save your life.

*Not gonna happen Mrage. Can’t take the guns away from criminals now. Training will help save my life, having an accurate, large caliber, high capacity firearm will help save my life too.

You take six out with one shot.

*Only in Hollywood.

Four out, firing twice at couple of them.

*Only in Hollywood.

Run if you can get away is proper behavior. Run to reset your firing position. You’ll quickly reload.

*Marge, you can’t possibly be this stupid.

There has to be a political push taking ammunition away from guns on the market today.

*Only if the 2nd Amendment is violated or repealed.

Everyone with less shots in one gun, society could be safer.

*Redundant Marge, and No again.

Remember a lot of Americans will never be armed, by choice. Due to reprisals people aren’t eager to take on gangs in gun fights.

*That’s fine, that’s their choice, not mine. If they don’t want to defend themselves, they can beg any attackers not to harm them.

When gangs hang out and they have weapons, they should have less shots per gun.

*If they are breaking no laws, gangs can have what everyone else has. If they are convicted felons, they can’t legally have guns Marge.

How about a tank?

Mortar?

Bazooka?

Nuclear weapon?

Where do you draw the line?

I have no problem with guns or gun owners or concealed carry - but how big of a gun do you want?

6 shots in handguns, clips and revolvers is enough.

I want gang members and criminals to have less shots.

So the gun you purchase, criminals abuse. Who should change first?

You claim to be accurate, target shooting with guns helps, why not help inaccurate shooters to have less shots.

Your Right to weapons are not infringed. Society has less shots fired in neighborhoods. At least the shooters will reload, or drop one gun and pick up another. A pause will happen.

That pause could save a life.

If gangs had less shots in guns and your attacked by them, training should save your life.

You take six out with one shot.

Four out, firing twice at couple of them.

Run if you can get away is proper behavior. Run to reset your firing position. You’ll quickly reload.

There has to be a political push taking ammunition away from guns on the market today.

Everyone with less shots in one gun, society could be safer.

Remember a lot of Americans will never be armed, by choice. Due to reprisals people aren’t eager to take on gangs in gun fights.

I don’t imagine your eager.

When gangs hang out and they have weapons, they should have less shots per gun.