Deaf Smith
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,722
- Reaction score
- 85
Yes keep in mind guys, if those that feel the 2nd Amendment's 'reasonable regulation' includes registration, then the case below, decided by SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The United States) decided that convicted felons do not need to register any guns as it would violate their 5th Amendment rights.
U.S. Supreme Court Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968)
(No. 236 Argued October 11, 1967 Decided January 29, 1968)
Held:
1. Congress, subject to constitutional limitations, has authority to regulate the manufacture, transfer, and possession of firearms, and may tax unlawful activities. Pp. 390 U. S. 90, 390 U. S. 98.
2. Petitioner's conviction under § 5851 for possession of an unregistered firearm is not properly distinguishable from a conviction under § 5841 for failure to register possession of a firearm, and both offenses must be deemed subject to any constitutional deficiencies arising under the Fifth Amendment from the obligation to register. Pp. 390 U. S. 90-95.
3. A proper claim of the privilege against self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for failure to register under § 5841 or for possession of an unregistered firearm under § 5851. Pp. 390 U. S. 95-100.
4. Restrictions upon the use by federal and state authorities of information obtained as a consequence of the registration requirement,
suggested by the Government, is not appropriate. Marchetti v. United States, ante, p. 390 U. S. 39, and Grosso v. United States, ante, p. 390 U. S. 62. Pp. 390 U. S. 99-100.
5. Since any proceeding in the District Court upon a remand must inevitably result in the reversal of petitioner's conviction, it would be neither just nor appropriate to require such needless action, and accordingly the judgment is reversed. Pp. 390 U. S. 100-101. 372 F.2d 651, reversed.
In short, posession of an unregistered gun by a felon is the same as failing to register it by the felon, and since to register it would be to admit they had posession of the gun, then they don't have to register!
So ask yourself, what then is the reason for registering guns?
Deaf
U.S. Supreme Court Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968)
(No. 236 Argued October 11, 1967 Decided January 29, 1968)
Held:
1. Congress, subject to constitutional limitations, has authority to regulate the manufacture, transfer, and possession of firearms, and may tax unlawful activities. Pp. 390 U. S. 90, 390 U. S. 98.
2. Petitioner's conviction under § 5851 for possession of an unregistered firearm is not properly distinguishable from a conviction under § 5841 for failure to register possession of a firearm, and both offenses must be deemed subject to any constitutional deficiencies arising under the Fifth Amendment from the obligation to register. Pp. 390 U. S. 90-95.
3. A proper claim of the privilege against self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for failure to register under § 5841 or for possession of an unregistered firearm under § 5851. Pp. 390 U. S. 95-100.
4. Restrictions upon the use by federal and state authorities of information obtained as a consequence of the registration requirement,
suggested by the Government, is not appropriate. Marchetti v. United States, ante, p. 390 U. S. 39, and Grosso v. United States, ante, p. 390 U. S. 62. Pp. 390 U. S. 99-100.
5. Since any proceeding in the District Court upon a remand must inevitably result in the reversal of petitioner's conviction, it would be neither just nor appropriate to require such needless action, and accordingly the judgment is reversed. Pp. 390 U. S. 100-101. 372 F.2d 651, reversed.
In short, posession of an unregistered gun by a felon is the same as failing to register it by the felon, and since to register it would be to admit they had posession of the gun, then they don't have to register!
So ask yourself, what then is the reason for registering guns?
Deaf
