Previous  1  2  3  4  5

Sheeps are usually the mass. I think that people believing that the registry is good are sheeps, not the another way.

   

It told them there were several weapons registered to that address, and they took the threat accordingly seriously.

   

You apply that logic to everything?

   

And if he hadn't registered his guns but still owned them? I'd say the registry gives law enforcement a false sense of security. What if they hadn't taken his threat seriously and he was a loon that shot up some people. You cannot depend on a registry and it's accuracy to gauge your reaction to a potential crime.

   

I'd say the registry confirms already held assumptions. This line of reasoning - that if the registry says no guns then police will assume no guns - seems to me an incredible insult to the intelligence of our police officers.

   

And your seeming predilection for the police to assume everyone is an armed loon is an insult to liberty.

Just who the fuck do you think cops work for anyway? They are supposed to protect the public and protect the rights of the public. Instead what's happening is if you've made the mistake of registering a firearm and then had someone accuse you of making threats then you automatically lose your rights in the name of police expediency?

Again, and let me restate; Just who the fuck do you think cops work for anyway?

If I, or anyone else, is to automatically lose my rights when it suits the police then they no longer work for me and they no longer protect me or my rights.

Instead they are become what I've repeatedly sworn to protect against.

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely; and without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter; So help me God.

Oh, and do bear in mind I'm a reserve LEO.

   

Whoo, I seem to have hit a nerve.

All I'm saying is that the only pragmatic assumption the police can make when responding to a call that there may be firearms present. To assume their absence is just not rational. The registry can confirm the former assumption, but not the latter. And to say that the police, upon checking the registry and seeing nothing will assme their absence is an affront.

   

Hmmm....how do you manage that. I'm a full time Sagittarius. Were you born on the cusp or something?

   

yup, the registry is not a REALTIME Inventory System, it should never be used that way by the police otherwise some of them may end up dead wrong.

   

Which is why I'm so amazed that out of ALL the places those guns could have been, they were actually in the home they were registered to!

Assuming the house's footprint was about 1000 square feet (rough estimate), and a global surface area of 5.5x10^15 square feet, that's a 1 in 5.5 trillion chance!

   

Once again you are sermonizing to the wrong country.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5