Fact: According to the Supreme Court, criminals do not have to obtain licenses or register their weapons, as that would be an act of self-incrimination.
(Haynes vs. U.S. 390 U.S. 85, 1968)
WOW.. Someone had a good attorney.[/quote]
If you’re not allowed to possess a weapon, it seems logical that there should not be a requirement to register any weapon you happen to have illegally. It’s redundant. Just having a weapon is a felony that carries a prison term up to 10 years.[/quote]
Not exactly. If registering a weapon is a prerequisite to possessing, it does not follow that by being a felon, you are exempted from this. Though you might feel it is redundant, it is a different crime than the possession. If you are driving recklessly AND end up killing someone in the process, you can be charged with both manslaughter and reckless driving. These are separate charges.
What the Supreme court found, was that the act of registering itself would be self-incrimination for the felon, because they would have to identify themselves as being a felon.. who is trying to register a gun. It had nothing to do with being redundant.
Part of the reason I found it all humorous, is that gun registration is portrayed as a way to keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals. If they are not required to register their firearms, then how is gun registration supposed to accomplish this? Brings in a lot of important questions with respect to gun registration and civil rights. Historically, gun registration lists have been used to confiscate firearms owned by citizens.
