Over 1,000 Gun Owners Violate Washington’s I-594- A Gun Control Law- In Front Of Police!

a reply to: NavyDoc

Not really, honestly. Now if they wanted track my every keystroke that would be an infringement in my opinion. Just registering something doesn't infringe on the right to own that object.

Though, I do see the logic in some folks who say gun registration makes it easier for them to take the guns away when the Obama/NWO/Illuminati/Mason boot comes down hard.

Though... if they really did want to take guns away, why bother with registration in the first place? Just say "Okay, no more gun sales."

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
a reply to: NavyDoc

You could make a rather shaky argument for it violating my freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But that entirely depends on the criteria of registration.

Im still not sure how registering your firearm violates your right to bear arms though?

Because asking permission from the state (which is what registration is, what if your registration is denied?) to exercise a civil right is an infringement on that right.

Because, registration precedes confiscation and one should never trust a politician when they "promise" that they would not use registration to infringe or confiscate. California is a great example. People were made to register their "assault weapons" with the promise that the registry would never be used for confiscation. Then, a few years later, said "assault weapons" were banned and guess what? All those foolish enough to register them had to turn them in or remove them from the state.

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
I dont understand how registering your firearm infringes upon your right to bear arms?

Is there any sneaky clauses in the registration process that could prevent you bearing arms?

Ask the people of Louisiana who had their guns confiscated by officers who knew who had them due to registration lists after hurricane Katrina. just one example.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: NavyDoc

Not really, honestly. Now if they wanted track my every keystroke that would be an infringement in my opinion. Just registering something doesn't infringe on the right to own that object.

Though, I do see the logic in some folks who say gun registration makes it easier for them to take the guns away when the Obama/NWO/Illuminati/Mason boot comes down hard.

Though... if they really did want to take guns away, why bother with registration in the first place? Just say "Okay, no more gun sales."

Different mindset, I guess. Some feel perfectly happy with the state monitoring their possession of the means to exercise their first amendment, and some do not. They did register typewriters in Romania during the dictatorship, why do you think they did that?

a reply to: NavyDoc

The NSA and it's monitoring programs aside, I don't like the idea of alphabet agencies watching what I do. I never said I'd be in favor of computer registration, but I don't see the immediate infringement. As I expanded on in my previous post, registration could eventually lead to taking these things away, so I don't really support registration computer, nor guns.

one example: www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: NavyDoc

The NSA and it's monitoring programs aside, I don't like the idea of alphabet agencies watching what I do. I never said I'd be in favor of computer registration, but I don't see the immediate infringement. As I expanded on in my previous post, registration could eventually lead to taking these things away, so I don't really support registration computer, nor guns.

Then we are agreed, with the small exception of that I think that registration in and of itself is an infringement.

a reply to: Dabrazzo

It's in infringement. Plain and simple.

additionally when it was ruled that the police had to give the guns back they made rules that made it nearly impossible to get the guns back. guns that had been owned for decades they required sales reciepts for. so they got sued.

usatoday30.usatoday.com...


but what i learned was registration is infringement and it enable wholesale confiscation whenever the gun grabbers decide to do it.

a reply to: Expat888

Funnily enough, I was wondering if a 1000 black gun-owners would be allowed to conduct the same protest peacefully??

...or would there be a powerful police presence and arrests for 'violating' the I-594- A Gun Control Law?

I guess we'll never know.

a reply to: Kandinsky

From what I understand, the protest consisted of people from many races. Not entirely sure why you had to bring up the race subject. The crowd hailed from many different races, from my understanding.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Expat888

Funnily enough, I was wondering if a 1000 black gun-owners would be allowed to conduct the same protest peacefully??

...or would there be a powerful police presence and arrests for 'violating' the I-594- A Gun Control Law?

I guess we'll never know.

i am pretty sure that would depend on their conduct. especially with all the cameras there. if they were showing their asses and violent or gave signs of a propensity for rioting they would be arrested like anyone else showing their asses should be.

a reply to: NavyDoc

People were made to register their "assault weapons" with the promise that the registry would never be used for confiscation. Then, a few years later, said "assault weapons" were banned and guess what? All those foolish enough to register them had to turn them in or remove them from the state

Fair enough, I was not aware registration was being used as a means to confiscate weapons. Then yeah sounds like a violation of your right to bear arms to me.

People should probably start engaging in open warfare against state buildings then.

originally posted by: MichiganSwampBuck
I bet there is a few thousand people on their "list" now.

If they are unregistered gun owners, the PTB know about them now. Watch for the round up to start in a short while.

And you think you aren't on their list for being on a site that talks about thing such as this..
Funny that? eh?

Not saying ATS is in wit CIA.. But CIA got info on all...

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
I dont understand how registering your firearm infringes upon your right to bear arms?

Is there any sneaky clauses in the registration process that could prevent you bearing arms?

Shall not be infringed comes to mind..

Actually funny all gun laws are technically illegal because well They infringe on a right that says shall not be infringed..

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Expat888

Funnily enough, I was wondering if a 1000 black gun-owners would be allowed to conduct the same protest peacefully??

...or would there be a powerful police presence and arrests for 'violating' the I-594- A Gun Control Law?

I guess we'll never know.

Hell naw..

Great to see this, along with the acknowledgement and participation of some elected officials.

I got one word in an attempt to describe my excitement...

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Because asking permission from the state (which is what registration is, what if your registration is denied?) to exercise a civil right is an infringement on that right.

Because, registration precedes confiscation and one should never trust a politician when they "promise" that they would not use registration to infringe or confiscate. California is a great example. People were made to register their "assault weapons" with the promise that the registry would never be used for confiscation. Then, a few years later, said "assault weapons" were banned and guess what? All those foolish enough to register them had to turn them in or remove them from the state.

This is the reason why I'm not too thrilled with laws that prevent people with mental problems from owning guns. On the one side, there are people who should not have a gun due to their mental instability and on the other side there is no concrete way to identify these people. You usually don't find out until it is too late.
Then there are people who believe that anyone who wants to own a gun is mentally unstable. In my opinion Psychology is NOT a science. You could take the same person to two different psychologists and one would claim that the person is sane, while the other would claim that the person was insane.

So 1000's of people with guns and no swat teams present....

Stand up for your rights and all but let's stop acting like every protester in the other issues were also rioters and looters when most were people not even from the area that got caught.

There where plenty of protest that did not involve any looting or rioting that were met with heavy handed police reaction.

And ya how does registration infringe your right to own a fire arm?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
And ya how does registration infringe your right to own a fire arm?

Because of the whole shall not be infringed and the whole I dunno.. The government shouldn't be in my business in the 1st place.. You know that one amendment that says not specifically under the constitution thing.. Right to privacy..

In case you are unsure..

Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

There is that...

What some people EPICALLY miss is the background check is a 4th amendment VIOLATION.

The background check is the very epitome of GUILTY until proven innocent, and the only GD permit,license, any American needs is the US CONSTITUTION.


Good for those gun owners, and every should follow their lead. The state is the servant of the people,

Not it's master.