U.S. Supreme Court's 1968 Haynes v. U.S. decision:
Haynes, a convicted felon, was convicted of unlawful possession of an
unregistered short-barreled shotgun. He argued that for a convicted
felon to register a gun was effectively an announcement to the
government that he was breaking the law and that registration violated
his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.
The court, by an 8 - 1 margin, agreed, concluding: "We hold that a
proper claim of the constitutional privilege against
self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for
failure to register a firearm, or for possession of an unregistered
firearm."
(Summary from American Rifleman magazine, March 2000, page 20)
So, when these gun registration schemes are announced, be very aware
that only lawful gun-owners are required to register their firearms.
Unlawful owners are exempted from registration laws due to their
constitutional protection against self-incrimination.
Amazing..... but true.
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/390/85/
Haynes, a convicted felon, was convicted of unlawful possession of an
unregistered short-barreled shotgun. He argued that for a convicted
felon to register a gun was effectively an announcement to the
government that he was breaking the law and that registration violated
his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.
The court, by an 8 - 1 margin, agreed, concluding: "We hold that a
proper claim of the constitutional privilege against
self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for
failure to register a firearm, or for possession of an unregistered
firearm."
(Summary from American Rifleman magazine, March 2000, page 20)
So, when these gun registration schemes are announced, be very aware
that only lawful gun-owners are required to register their firearms.
Unlawful owners are exempted from registration laws due to their
constitutional protection against self-incrimination.
Amazing..... but true.
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/390/85/