Regretbly, you can only track the weapons of law abiding citizens. So, tracking doesn't work.

>Well, I'm all for tracking guns for the purpose of knowing tracking them to criminals.
>
>The problem is that some would argue that it violates the 2nd amendment.
>
>And, crimanals are surely not going to register their guns, so all you've done is put another
>hinderence on a law-abiding citizen.
>
>
>
>>We have a national registry in Canada - It doesn't work. It's just a big waste of tax money. All it did was make every gun own a criminal in the eyes of the law. The government has since abandoned registry of long guns.
>>
>>>I think there should be a national registry AND a national firearms license.
>>>
>>>Right now in the US a 16 year old kid can get a driver's permit and get behind the wheel of a
>>>dangerous vehicle.
>>>
>>>A potential gun owner should be required to attend training before being awarded a license.
>>>Then each time he/she buys a gun, it's entered into the database.
>>>
>>>Not only is the person tracked, but trained. This would reduce the accidental deaths by guns and
>>>help track firearms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Tracy,
>>>>
>>>>Interesting links....and really supporting what is common sense.
>>>>
>>>>By the way, does anyone recall the Islamic looting that took place in Europe right after the 9/11 attacks? Makes you wonder if all those guys would have done so, had they known that their victims would have been able to defend themselves.
>>>>
>>>>I'm open to discussion on specifics of making sure that background checks for gun owners are as full-proof as possible. But the notions being promoted by some here are just way off base.
>>>>
>>>>Kevin