By: Garry L. Hamilton
In response to Pierre Legrand’s post on the registration of gold ownership: Washington State Republicans Betray The Ideals Of Personal Freedom and Our Right To Privacy…We Need A Third Party!
After the fashion of previous firearm confiscation programs.
First, you get people to register sales/transfers.
Then you get people to register the fact of ownership, regardless of duration.
Then, when you have “enough” records to track “enough” of whatever commodity or contraband you mean to interdict, you issue the appropriate edict or declaration, or pass the required legislation, or enact the desired regulation declaring that all of [whatever] must be turned in.
An amnesty period is established, during which a “no questions asked” policy is in force.
At the end of that period, anyone found still in possession of [contraband] will be held in violation of [relevant law/directive/edict/regulation] and subject to whatever defined penalties.
This is a time tested pattern.
First comes registration, then confiscation.
Want to have a little fun? Try telling the people involved that registration leads to confiscation. You’ll be labeled a conspiracy nut. For people involved in the preservation of gun rights, this pattern is all too familiar.
Now, the reasoning behind the confiscation depends on the subject. In this case, it’s precious metals and stuff like that. Presumably the theory is that all wealth belongs ultimately to the state. Kind of along the lines of real estate — once you understand that “real” hasn’t anything to do with reality, but everything to do with royalty (yes, “real” is Spanish for “royal”) — it all “belongs to the king.”
I could be wrong. That happens a lot. But I think that’s the framing that best explains this.