** ** http://www.survivalblog.com/2013/02/one-absurdity-of-gun-registration-criminals-are-exempt.html
**** One Absurdity of Gun Registration: Criminals Are Exempt**** ** ** The mass media is still all atwitter with talk of "closing the gun show loophole" and "universal background checks." These phrases are tossed about without concern to their true intent: a* de fact*o system of gun registration in these United States. I am dead set against any form of registration, since the history of the 20th Century showed countless times that *registration leads to eventual confiscation*. There is one other inherent problem with gun registration schemes that is often ignored: that is that it only applies to *law-abiding* citizens. By virtue of established case law and cemented with an 8-1 Supreme Court decision, *criminals are exempt from gun registration because it would violate their Fifth Amendment protection from self-incrimination*. Second Amendment expert Clayton Cramer explains it all in a fine essay titled: The Fifth Amendment, Self-Incrimination, and Gun Registration<http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.haynes.html>. Here is an excerpt:**** In Haynes v. U.S. (1968), a Miles Edward Haynes appealed his conviction for unlawful possession of an unregistered short-barreled shotgun. His argument was ingenious: since he was a convicted felon at the time he was arrested on the shotgun charge, he could not legally possess a firearm. Haynes further argued that for a convicted felon to register a gun, especially a short-barreled shotgun, was effectively an announcement to the government that he was breaking the law. If he did register it, as 26 U.S.C. sec.5841 required, he was incriminating himself; but if he did not register it, the government would punish him for possessing an unregistered firearm -- a violation of 26 U.S.C. sec.5851. Consequently, his Fifth Amendment protection against self- incrimination ("No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself") was being violated -- he would be punished if he registered it, and punished if he did not register it. While the Court acknowledged that there were circumstances where a person might register such a weapon without having violated the prohibition on illegal possession or transfer, both the prosecution and the Court acknowledged such circumstances were "uncommon." The Court concluded:* *** "We hold that a proper claim of the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for failure to register a firearm under sec.5841 or for possession of an unregistered firearm under sec.5851." **** If you ever get into an argument with a neighbor or co-worker about any gun registration stupidity, then I recommend that you either send them the link to Cramer's essay, or hand them a printout of it. End of argument! - J.W.R. **** ** ** ** ** ** ** -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
