(March 22, 2014 at 6:13 pm)Bad Writer Wrote:(March 22, 2014 at 4:03 pm)KUSA Wrote: You brought it up.
Your responses are exactly why I get fed up trying to discuss this stuff. Your 'Murica attitude is fucking childish.
Yes, I mentioned it first on this thread, but I am talking about its origin in general. If you don't know the reasons FOR it, then your reasons against it will only come across as knee-jerk-reactionary. If you don't like having to pay an extra tax, that's understandable, and that's probably as far as your argument can take you.
In the meantime, I'm trying to figure out why states would need a gun registry in the first place. My best bet is that it has to do with oversight. States are more concerned about CYA (cover yer ass) policies than taking away your rights and your belongings. That's why there are car registries and even pet registries. If this is a bad idea, besides a small taxation and confiscation due to mishandling, then what's the beef?
You have not stated what benefit registration would provide. So there is no good purpose for it.
Would you care to correct your oversight?
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
