Shot heard around the world be fired first in Conneticut?

[Carrikature]

whether it's possible or not... it is. I'm more interested in how gun owners, specifically Christians, will handle it within that hypothetical scenario.

Reread it again in context, please. My statement of 'impossible' was specifically in relation to mass action. They don't even know who to go after. They don't even know how many there are. Yeah, they could go after a few, and yeah the rest could get more defiant and vocal. That's going to result in the law getting changed, not charging thousands of people as felons. It's ludicrous, and the senator in your quote knows it.

[seanD]

Reread it again in context, please. My statement of 'impossible' was specifically in relation to mass action. They don't even know who to go after. They don't even know how many there are. Yeah, they could go after a few, and yeah the rest could get more defiant and vocal. That's going to result in the law getting changed, not charging thousands of people as felons. It's ludicrous, and the senator in your quote knows it.

Again, you're merely speculating...

Nothing can be argued from the article as an absolute one way or the other. But, again, it's irrelevant with the thread's intent.

[Cow Poke]

Why are people so against a gun registry?

If the government isn't going to do anything with it, why are they so interested in a gun registry?

[Cow Poke]

Didn't our Attorney General of the US tell Governors they can, in effect, pick and choose the laws they wish to enforce? But -- that only applies to laws the AG doesn't like?

[Carrikature]

Again, you're merely speculating...

And you're not? At least mine uses a fair degree of common sense.

Nothing can be argued from the article as an absolute one way or the other. But, again, it's irrelevant with the thread's intent.

If your intent is solely Christian responses, the thread belongs in Biblical Ethics. As written, nothing in the OP makes that clear.

[Carrikature]

Didn't our Attorney General of the US tell Governors they can, in effect, pick and choose the laws they wish to enforce? But -- that only applies to laws the AG doesn't like?

Er, you work in/with law enforcement. How is this any different than what every cop does every day?

[seanD]

And you're not? At least mine uses a fair degree of common sense.




If your intent is solely Christian responses, the thread belongs in Biblical Ethics. As written, nothing in the OP makes that clear.

What part of "nothing can be argued from the article as an absolute one way or the other" is unclear to you? You really do love to argue just to argue. And I never said I was interested in Christian responses only. I said, I'd like views from gun owners, particularly Christian gun owners (the two are typically synonymous anyway).

[Cow Poke]

Er, you work in/with law enforcement. How is this any different than what every cop does every day?

[Carrikature]

What part of "nothing can be argued from the article as an absolute one way or the other" is unclear to you?

Who's arguing absolutes?

You really do love to argue just to argue.

Yep, that's me. Doesn't have a thing to do with getting people to use their brains, or to strive for accuracy. Nope, not one bit.

And I never said I was interested in Christian responses only. I said, I'd like views from gun owners, particularly Christian gun owners (the two are typically synonymous anyway).

The answer is no, I would not register. You also asked what people in Connecticut should do, and it was to that my responses were geared.


Yeah, I'd chalk that up to ignorance. However, I could see an important distinction between not enforcing a law for whatever reason and publicly declaring oneself opposed. There seems to be a recent trend (see Bill's comment) for police/sheriffs to issue official statements of refusal. I could grant a "dangerous and frightening precedent" in that case. It's not the sheriff's job to decide which laws they deem constitutional.

[seanD]

It's not the sheriff's job to decide which laws they deem constitutional.

That's another interesting issue that could lead to an even deeper debate. What if a government employee/employer feels that a law is unconstitutional.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah, I'd chalk that up to ignorance. However, I could see an important distinction between not enforcing a law for whatever reason and publicly declaring oneself opposed. There seems to be a recent trend (see Bill's comment) for police/sheriffs to issue official statements of refusal. I could grant a "dangerous and frightening precedent" in that case. It's not the sheriff's job to decide which laws they deem constitutional.

Well, that's how we get "sanctuary cities". I'm just saying that there's a lot of hypocrisy when somebody demands that officials "faithfully execute their office" by upholding laws, while, at the same time, implementing a policy of ignoring laws like immigration of "whatever". So much of it comes down to politics, not justice.

[RumTumTugger]

Why are people so against a gun registry?

have you seen Red Dawn?

[seanD]

Here we go. Rumtumtugger, you fell right into that trap.

[Cow Poke]

Why are people so against a gun registry?

Just curious -- what other personal property (kept in our homes) does the government routinely require us to "register"?

And the government has demonstrated a willingness to abuse "collected information", like IRS filings, applications for tax exemptions, etc. Who gets to see this "registry"? What is its purpose? What guaranty do we have it won't be leaked?

Source: Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

© Copyright Original Source

What probable cause does the government have that gives them an interest in what I keep in my own home?

[seanD]

Please, let's not turn this into a debate whether we're becoming nazi Germany or communist Russia. That debate will go nowhere between the left and the right.