by evilgenius » Sun 08 Oct 2017, 12:24:09
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'N')ot to mention a registry would in no ways be accurate. Most states do not require you keep any record of private sales and they don't have to go through a FFL. Although Illinois does require I keep a copy of private sales, as soon as I'm a Missouri resident, I'm going to burn them all.
Although there is not an explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has derived a generalized one through their reading of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The creation of a registry of this nature would immediately result in a court challenge to it.
Oh, so that's how big companies can violate your privacy every day! No chance, dude. You will not be able to argue against a registry by citing privacy. There has been no end of interpretation of legislation determining that your right to privacy doesn't exist. If it weren't so, that ex-Equifax CEO would be swinging. Karl Rove would be serving out a life term.
Harvey Weinstein, in the midst of his deep shame, may start it as a means to make good for all of the bad things he has done. Mark Zuckerberg may start it because he realized he has access to the information, and can't continue to look the other way. With such a dearth of accuracy inherent to those kinds of big data lists, for now at least, it will be your standard right wing gun owner who will want protection from winding up on it. Most gun owners don't own assault rifles. Most gun owners don't want a silencer. Most gun owners don't want a bump stock. They are either into hunting or protecting themselves during a foreseeable confrontation. Most gun owners wouldn't be on the list, if it was accurate.