Admittedly convoluted but honestly asked question, RE: registration laws
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?
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
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....
However, you have provided a good follow up question.
Last edited Wed Jul 6, 2016, 05:58 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?