Admittedly convoluted but honestly asked question, RE: registration laws

[Nuclear Unicorn]

It is established case precedent that a person intent on using a gun to commit a crime cannot be charged with failing to register their gun because doing something would violate their 5th Amendment protections against being forced to incriminate themselves (Haynes v US)

But suppose someone intended to violate no law except the law requiring registration? What could they be charged with?

[Straw Man]

1. An attempt at an honest answer.

The case precedent doesn't have to do with a person "intent on using a gun to commit a crime." It has to do with "prohibited person" status, i.e. a previously-convicted felon or other person who can't legally own a firearm. Such a person would be incriminating himself/herself if he/she attempted to register a firearm.

Hope that helped

[virginia mountainman]

2. Wouldn't...

The same being said for owning a 'banned firearm , or firearm item"?

Wouldn't attempts to register after a ban take effect, be self incrimination?

After all, some areas have made the crime of owning a magazine (box with a spring) more serious than some very serious sex crimes, New York, I am looking at you....

[Nuclear Unicorn]

3. Straw Man provided a very good answer to my OP. I honestly had not considered what he

replied with.

However, you have provided a good follow up question.

[Straw Man]

4. I am not a lawyer ...

Last edited Wed Jul 6, 2016, 06:58 PM - Edit history (1)

... but I think that a prohibited person could still be charged with "felon in possession" but not with the additional charge of "unregistered firearm."

In mountainman's follow-up, I think the person could be charged. Said person is not a "prohibited person" but does possess an illegal firearm.

In other words, someone with a clean record could be charged. Someone with a criminal history could not.

Ain't life grand?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. Another good reason to be an anarchist: It's easier to keep up with all the rules.