Previous Post
Next Post

Some call him TTAG’s resident troll. Others consider him nothing more than grist for our collective ill. I mean, mill. I call him a true believer. Whether or not MikeB30200 believes in God, and how that informs his zeal for gun control, is an interesting question. Regardless, I reckon the American expat took this passage of the bible to heart: “Then the king commanded, and they brought Daniel, and cast him into the den of lions. Now the king spake and said unto Daniel, Thy God whom thou servest continually, he will deliver thee’.” Seriously. MikeB302000 gets props for taking y’all on. Times two when someone—in this case me—manages to pin him down on policy. Switching and mixing metaphors mid-stream, it’s not easy to break cover when there are dozens of well-trained snipers watch your every move . . .

But here it is: MikeB302000’s vision of gun control, originally posted here. Sorry, did I say gun control? I meant “safety.” And again hats off to MikeB302000 for not buying into his fellow travellers’ rebranding exercise. Yet.

Of course, the Mikester didn’t address the issue of registering ammunition, as I requested. But still, by thy words he shall be known. Deeds? As in actual policy? God help us . . .

Forget about all the guns already owned, let’s start from now on. All new gun purchases have to be made by licensed gun buyers, maybe that FOID system would be a good example. Then every weapon would be registered to a particular person who has a license and would have to present himself and the gun to the police after three months to renew the registration. After that the renewal would be yearly.

Along with this, naturally there’d be required background checks on any type of gun transfer. The registration of a gun would transfer with it to the next licensed owner.

Straw purchasing would be eliminated. So would those supposedly good faith private transfers to criminals which take place now with such ease.

[Note: purely personal attacks (a.k.a., flaming) will be deleted.]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I’m going to bet long odds that most of the guns that end up in the hands of criminals come from people that do not actively participate in the gun rights movement, ie NRA members all the way down to active commenters on these types of blogs.

    Peer pressure by this method is far more effective than an onerous registration scheme that ultimately leads to confiscation.

  2. You have no safeguard against government abuse.

    Try looking up a case in Massachusetts where a gun owner insulted the son of a local police chief for being uncouth towards him – daddy came right along and took the guns away with a false charge of “domestic terrorism.”

  3. What about theft? Criminals steal guns.

    As with all feel-good gun legislation, your plan would only affect those who willingly comply with the law.

  4. And what purpose does this “plan” serve other than to further elevate the state’s superiority to the citizen?

    • That is a very good question. What exactly is the purpose of this massively expensive and invasive system? I have to take all my guns to the police station every year to have my permit renewed? How many new cops or other government bureaucrats will that require?
      Do I have to bow with my head to the floor as I beg for permission to own my weapons for another year?

  5. Forget about all the guns already owned…

    That, right there, dooms the plan from the very beginning. Given the number of firearms that’re already in public circulation (somewhere around 270,000,000+), omitting them from MikeB’s draconian scheme exposes him as nothing more than your average grade of gun-grabber, not someone who is honestly interested in reducing crime and increasing safety – if that were the case, he’d be interested in all firearms, not just the easy pickings that result in a quick-and-dirty registration scheme.

    • Right, given the lack of success Canada has had in their gun registry, it is pretty foolish to think that we’re going to do any better with a much larger gun population.

      • That gun registry is specifically for long arms which had never been required to be registered. Handguns have always been required to be registered. It is a boondoggle precisely because it is a) voluntary; I don’t have to register my long arms if I don’t want to, and b) completely unnecessary; crimes with long arms are few and far between. It is a complete waste of time and money in an attempt to appease gun critics and pander to Liberal party voters.

        In fact, our current hand gun legislation is less restrictive that than that proposed in the article. While a handgun owner must pass two fire-arms safety courses, be subject to a background check and be a member of a non-profit gun club, once licensed and registered, no further action is required. Hell, the fee for the licensing is refunded once the license is approved. I don’t have to present my pistols for yearly re-registration, nor jump through the hoops mentioned. However, the RCMP reserves the right to search my house without notice to ensure that they are stored properly. I have never heard of this happening, however, and I doubt it is excercised often.

        Should such legislation come to pass in the US, Canada would have freer gun laws. Now, that, is ironic.

        • FYI from the rabbi

          FBI, 2009, Crime in the United States report states that rifles (not just so-called assault weapons, but all rifles) account for only 2.55 percent of all us murders and is the lowest use among all types of weapons including hands and feet.

          Handguns – 47%
          unknown firearms 14%
          other weapons 14%
          Edged weapons 13%
          hands/feet 6%
          shotguns 3%
          rifle 2.5%
          (numbers rounded)

    • I suspect he believes many or most of them will be eventually brought into the fold by transfers and personal sales which will have to take place in front of the Bureaucrats Almighty.

  6. It’s impossible to discuss this issue with someone that states for the record:

    “C’mon Joe, it’s not like that at all. I don’t support everything, and many things the “official” gun controllers do accept, like the legitimacy of the 2nd Amendment, I don’t.”

    If a citizen of the US does not accept the legitimacy of the Constitution, then it’s not really possible to debate the 2nd Amendment with that person. It’s like having a discussion about orbital mechanics with someone that believes the Sun orbits the Earth. Your frame of reference is so entirely different that meaningful discussion is impossible.

    • Jeff, You’re doing that exaggerating thing again. Isn’t what I really say enough for you to dispute?

      I don’t question the legitimacy of the entire Constitution as you inferred. I consider the 2nd and 3rd Amendments as irrelevant. I think counting the slaves as three-quarters was pretty bad at the time and meaningless now. Some other parts are pretty good still. My point is, you need to take it down from the altar and use some common sense with it.

      • You _do_ know that there’re ways to modify the Constitution without resorting to unconstitutional means… right?

      • “The constitution says whatever I want it to say, and you are amoral if you want to have a say”

        Nice to see the whole hypocrisy boiled down so well.

  7. It seems to me that the government has a right and obligation to protect its citizens from terrorists, child-pornographers and the like, so I think we should have a licensing and registration system for blogs. Every blogger must be licensed. There would certainly be a background check to determine whether the licensee is a pornographer or terrorist. Licensed bloggers would receive a BLID (Blogging Legal Identity) card. Every blogger would then be compelled to register his or her blog every year and pay an appropriate tax. Of course, nonresident foreign blogs would be illegal (just as nonresident aliens cannot own guns).

    What’s wrong with my proposal?

  8. Gun registration. That’s that thing governments do before they confiscate law-abiding citizens’ guns, right?

    Of course, I say “law-abiding citizens'” guns since non-law-abiding citizens wouldn’t register anything anyway.

    Do you think if we made everyone register their marijuana and cocaine there would be less of it illegally in the U.S.?

  9. Someone once said; “…when you negotiate for something you already have, you have already lost…” or something like that.

    Jeff Lynch is right, leave this guy alone.

  10. Jeff is 100 percent on target, you can’t reason with someone who hates guns and has no respect for our constitution. I love Ralph’s idea for licensing trolls, opps I mean bloggers, but that could only happen in a perfect world. I loved the bible reference since my oldest niece is a sunday school teacher and she is one smart young woman. I recently told her that my favorite passage is the one about “DO IT TO OTHERS BEFORE THEY DO IT TO YOU”, the poor girl doesn’t get my sence of humor and quickly googled the correct passage on her laptop (that I paid for) and then attempted to set me on the right path. I think it’s nice of RF to allow our resident troll to spew his nonsence here so that we can all have a good laugh (especially after Ralph jumps in with his usual witty comments). I think we should dedicate one day each month to all out flaming of any troll that needs a good beat down.

  11. Hmmm… I wonder

    Forget about all the computers already owned, let’s start from now on. All new computer purchases have to be made by licensed computer buyers, maybe that FOID system would be a good example. Then every computer would be registered to a particular person who has a license and would have to present himself and the computer to the police after three months to renew the registration which would include a full forensic examination of the hard drive for illegal material. After that the renewal would be yearly.

    Along with this, naturally there’d be required background checks on any type of computer transfer. The registration of a computer would transfer with it to the next licensed owner.

    Internet Child Pornography would be eliminated. So would those supposedly good faith private transfers of computers to child pornographers which take place now with such ease.

    I wonder if MikeB would be OK with this?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here