Historically, licensing and registration has only served two purposes: taxation and confiscation. Legal gun owners are told that all they have to do is pass a few tests, fill out some paperwork, pay a few fees, and they will be able to keep their firearms. However, more often than not, the legal gun owner's willingness to comply and compromise has been rewarded with the eventual loss of their arms. Their governments would decided to ban subsets of firearms or further restrict who should have firearms and use their licensing and registration records as a guide to whose house to show up at and what weapons to take, after they've given the gun owners a chance to voluntarily turn them in.
It happened in Germany, the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and now Cuba.
Cuba has declared a two-month amnesty for citizens to register unlicensed guns, and says those passing aptitude and psychological tests will be allowed to keep their weapons.
Cubans were encouraged to register any weapons they owned in the years after Fidel Castro and his band of rebels toppled dictator Fulgencio Batista on Jan. 1, 1959. But later authorities used a list of those who had sought licenses to go door-to-door and encourage them to turn over their firearms - even antiques considered family heirlooms.
I wonder how many Cuban gun owners will have learned from the past and simply not comply? Better yet, how many American gun owners will fail to learn from Cuba? How many American gun owners will keep deluding themselves with the thought that it can't happen here (when it already has in some states)?
After the Heller decision, the gun controllers were giddy at the fact nothing was said to prohibit licensing and registration. And while Heller is the law of the land, licensing and registration is one law I will not comply with. Not when there are so many instances throughout history of licensing and registration being a precursor to confiscation.