----- Original Message ----- From: "Guy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 8:34 AM Subject: [inbox] Re: discussion: is gun registration unconstitutional?
> Phil wrote: > The only remotely viable justification I've heard came from the California > DOJ. Two of their members spoke here last year, and I asked them what > benefit registration had in California. > > Their answer was that at the time of criminal conviction, the registration > database is checked to see if the newly minted felon had firearms that they > were no longer allowed to own. The DOJ spokesperson claimed they used the > database in this way around 3,000 times each year. > > However (and this is the biggie), when pressed for an answer as to how many > firearms were recovered under these circumstances, they could not provide > even a wild estimate. I suspect those heading off to the slammer find ways > of stashing or selling their property (claiming it was "lost" or "stolen") > as their trials move forward. If they are at all intelligent, you mean, or correctly identify that they are about to become convicted felons. Perhaps the better grade of gun predators are in this category; I would think many members of the methamphetamine class are unlikely to plan that far ahead. > If we assume that some fraction of the 3,000 checks finds a firearm or two, > then I see a cost/benefit ratio that is tragically out of balance. I wouldn't make that assumption--or at least, I wouldn't assume that a low recovery rate would be an indication of convicted felons being smart, but perhaps of a less than vigrous effort to find the guns. At a minimum, a recently convicted felon in California who transfers a firearm except through a licensed dealer or police agency has broken yet another law, and is subject to prosecution for it.
