[Kina]

I empathize with skepticism that a lot of people show towards centralized authority, but I have yet to see a meaningful proposal for an alternative that doesn't not ultimately rely on some sort of equally implicit trusted entity.

I don't think the answer here is to loudly proclaim that _all_ registries of persons are a terrible idea. We do need to ensure that the data is being handled appropriately which it absolutely is not being on any level. We need accountability and for that to occur we need an engaged and educated population.

[devwastaken]

Data of this sort cannot be handled safely. When it is politically popular to do so, it will be leaked by internal or external actors. The solution is simple and effective, don't make databases, only hand out ID's. The public and government has no right to know the personal ongoings of everyone's lives.

[iotku]

>I don't think the answer here is to loudly proclaim that _all_ registries of persons are a terrible idea.

Ultimately there has to be a record somewhere ensuring you're eligible to have a firearm (at the very least if you're operating on the common standard that felons don't have the right to have firearms), but past that you're just adding extra metadata which can be either stolen or given away "unintentionally".

If you're onboard with permit-less carry ("Constitutional Carry") there's no additional metadata needed.

The less data you have the less data there is to lose. (and it will get lost)

>We do need to ensure that the data is being handled appropriately which it absolutely is not being on any level. We need accountability and for that to occur we need an engaged and educated population.

Certainly need accountability, but once you've failed you can't put genie back into the bottle.

[hulitu]

> We need accountability and for that to occur we need an engaged and educated population.

The people who payed for the laws (lobby) do not want accountability for them.