Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I read an article that presents the NRA's argument for objecting to gun registration. This thread's topic/purpose is to examine and discuss the logical soundness/cogency of the argument against gun registration. What is the NRA's argument? Briefly, this: Premise: Gun registration will not stop any unlawful gun use. This is a true statement. Premise: Gun registration would make it easier to confiscate all of people's guns were ordinances prohibiting gun ownership passed. In the abstract, this is true; however, the premise assumes be extant an event that is all but impossible to effect: absent repealing the 2nd Amendment, it's not possible to pass and have stand laws that generally prohibit gun ownership among the citizenry. That the argument against registration relies in part on such an assumption subjects the argument to counterfactual illogic, thus making the argument invalid. "All" is important because the 2nd Amendment prevents states from can abstractly denying one's 2nd Amendment rights, but they can limit and/or regulate them. The way most states regulate guns is through licensing requirements and bans on certain guns within a given class. Those kinds of limits have generally been upheld by courts and Heller doesn't stop them. It's important to note that a limit and a ban are different things. To wit, the limits on the ownership of machine guns....Machines guns aren't banned in the U.S. -- Heller disallows it -- but they are subject to regulation. The National Firearms Act requires prospective owners to apply for permission to own machine guns whereafter, if granted, one must register the weapon. The Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 prohibits civilian ownership of machine guns predating the act's passage. Unless the SCOTUS says otherwise, this kind of regulation is a legitimate limit on the 2nd's rights. While a ban isn't legal, regulatory and procedural requirements are. Premise: Gun registration bolsters the public's perception of gun owners. This element of the argument suffers from logical flaw of ambiguity. The premise not only (1) doesn't specify what be the public's perception of gun owners, but also (2) it doesn't establish that whatever be that perception, the perception itself is mostly (or more) inaccurate. Sub-argument "A" ("A" is my nomenclature) used as a premise in the overall argument: New York's registration initiative allowed public access to the information in the registry. Gun registry records can be used, as occasionally were driver's license records, by ne'er do wells to select targets against whom or whose property they'd commit crimes. Additionally, non-criminals may obtain and review gun registry information to form opinions about the specific gun owners and use that information/opinion(s) in making adverse decisions with regard to a specific gun owner. Assumption --> Gun registry information must be made available to the public. Consequently, guns should not be registered because doing so abets criminals and partisans. Hypothesis contrary to fact: Gun registry information need not be made public. Governments have all sorts of information about each of us, and some of that information is publicly accessible and some is not. For instance, members of the public cannot obtain another private citizen's tax returns. There's nothing stopping gun registry info from being among the non-publicly disclosed information. Premise: Gun registration is a step in the sequence of events that enables and necessarily leads to (1) the confiscation of all guns such that laymen citizens will be unable to lawfully own a gun and (2) repeal of the 2nd Amendment. This is a textbook slippery-slope line of argument: Repeal of the 2nd in no way depends on the existence of a gun registry. That repeal can occur whether there is or is not a gun registry. Absent repealing the 2nd, laws prohibiting the ownership of any gun are unenforceable. The NRA's Conclusion: In light of the premises above, registration of guns should be opposed, etc. Thread Topic: The unsoundness/incogency (weakness) of the NRA's argument -- premises and conclusion -- against gun registration.