Can supporters of gun control explain the purpose behind a gun registry?

Instead, gun control legislation only ever puts up more hoops for the law-abiding, and does fuck-all to catch any criminals. I’d say that it at least “enhances the sentence” when criminals are caught - but firearms charges are the first to be pled away when plea bargaining, so why do we even have those laws in the first place, if they’re not going to be enforced?

They want to control the law-abiding? There’s the entire thesis. People who want gun registries are also in favour of gun control (as noted in the Question,) and the answer is within the question. “Gun control” has precisely sod-all to do with guns, it’s about control. If “gun control” actually did anything about crime, more people would be on board with the idea.

The purpose of a gun registry is to keep track of who owns what and how many - when neither datum is any of the government’s business, as a rule.

I’m wondering about attachment and transference with the therapist and the idea of escape and fantasy? How much do you think your strong feelings, constant thoughts, desires to be with your therapist are a way to escape from your present life? I wonder if the transference serves another purpose than to show us our wounds and/or past experiences, but is a present coping strategy for managing what we don’t want to face (even if unconsciously) in the present—-current relationships, life circumstances, etc. Can anyone relate to this concept of escape in relation to their therapy relationship? How does this play out for you?

And registries haven’t stopped or solved crimes. Neither has “ballistic fingerprinting” (anyone who tells you that “ballistic matching”/”ballistic fingerprinting” is absolutely correct either has no clew what they’re on about or they’re blowing smoke up your ass - it’s more “art” than “science,” and toolmarks made by a firearm are in a constant state of evolution. Even two bullets fired consecutively don’t 100% match…)

Whenever anyone complains about crime or crime stats, I tell them, “Well, then, look into the causes of crime and address those. What drives people to commit crimes? What drives theft? Burglary? Robbery? Assault? Murder? Rioting? Mayhem? Figure out how to address the causes - and be more consistent about dealing with violations instead of those ‘selective enforcement’ nonsense. (Like how the J6 people are getting shafted - hard - but the intentionally destructive BLM/AntiFa riots of 2020 were given a pass, despite causing billions in property damage, destroying businesses (many black-owned,) and killing at least a half-dozen people (I can’t remember a precise number, but I’m fairly sure it was more than a half-dozen.) Selective enforcement doesn’t help anyone. Consistent enforcement does.

If you want to see firearms crime drop, enforce firearm law. cf: “Project Exile.” Happened on the East Coast a little bit back, where it was mandated for a couple of years or so that, whatever other deals were made, firearm law violations received a mandatory sentence (and, I think, usually the maximum.) And whaddaya know - firearm crime when down! Why aren’t they still doing it? Because the touchy-feely leftist lunatic frings started bitching that it “disproportionately affected minorities” (well, let’s look at crime statistics and see what we can expect, hm?) and they made enough of a stink that politicians lost their will and blinked.

Why are Democrats at Q so desperate that they keep taking down my links to comments that prove the residents in Ohio have been filing complaints about the Haitians eating the local wildlife from ponds in the local parks? Election interference

Which was, frankly, stupid. The leftists should have been told to fuck off - if minorities are being affected disproportionately, perhaps minorities should not commit crimes disproportionately… (I know - simplistic solution. I’m a simple sort of guy.)