Licensing and Registration of firearms?

[HEDP]

.

Will a positive decision from SCOTUS on Incorporation in the McDonald vs. Chicago case affect the Licensing and Registration of firearms, or is that an entirely separate case?




If not, are there any cases currently that are arguing against Licensing and Registration?


.

[az4code23]

Haynes v. U.S. (1968), Miles Edward Haynes appealed his conviction for unlawful possession of an unregistered short-barreled shotgun. His argument was ingenious: since he was a convicted felon at the time he was arrested on the shotgun charge, he could not legally possess a firearm. Haynes further argued that for a convicted felon to register a gun, especially a short-barreled shotgun, was effectively an announcement to the government that he was breaking the law. If he did register it, as 26 U.S.C. sec.5841 required, he was incriminating himself; but if he did not register it, the government would punish him for possessing an unregistered firearm -- a violation of 26 U.S.C. sec.5851. Consequently, his Fifth Amendment protection against self- incrimination ("No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself") was being violated -- he would be punished if he registered it, and punished if he did not register it. While the Court acknowledged that there were circumstances where a person might register such a weapon without having violated the prohibition on illegal possession or transfer, both the prosecution and the Court acknowledged such circumstances were "uncommon.

[DAL]

I do not think that they will get to that point. The issue will be whether a licensing scheme that in effect amounts to a total ban is constitutional.

As far as I know, there are no federal cases yet that deal with how far a state or municipality can go with licensing or registration requiremnts.

[az4code23]

I do not think that they will get to that point. The issue will be whether a licensing scheme that in effect amounts to a total ban is constitutional.

As far as I know, there are no federal cases yet that deal with how far a state or municipality can go with licensing or registration requiremnts.

Agreed. That was the closest I could think of regarding registration; and you're completely right, there are no cases, that I have heard of that deal specifically on federal cases regarding licensing and registration.

There was:

National Firearms Act: Hearings Before the Committee on Ways and Means, 73rd Cong., 2nd sess., (Washington, DC, Government Printing Office: 1934), 21-22

Grimm v. City of New York, 56 Misc.2d 525, 289 N.Y.S.2d 358, 361 (1968)

State v. Schutzler, 249 N.E.2d 549 (Ohio Ct.Comm.Pleas 1969).

State v. Hamlin, 497 So.2d 1369, 1372 (La. 1986).

However nothing federal I could think of.

[pulicords]

While the Heller decision recognized the "right" to possess firearms, it also held that (like all rights) reasonable restrictions were permissible. Defining what's reasonable, will probably take decades to answer over dozens (if not hundreds) of lower court decisions. If one court decides that "licensing" is excessively intrusive, another might agree that requiring a million dollars worth of insurance coverage is legitimate.

At least the "right" is finally recognized as an individual right, much like freedom of speech or religion. Neither of these are without restrictions, but those that exist must have solid justification and the burden of proof is usually on the government to show how they're reasonable.

[DAL]

There are, of course, state cases on whether state and local licensing and registration laws violate the state constitution, and whether local licensing and registration laws violate state law. I do not follow those, except to some extent in California.

[ChopperCopper]

Again, Florida rocks. State law prohibits the compilation of any list of gun owners.

[LINY]

Again, Florida rocks. State law prohibits the compilation of any list of gun owners.

That sounds like the only thing going for Florida nowadays!