Originally Posted by gunnails
I disagree, it went beyond knee jerk and rash, it was done punitively, with a political ax to grind, also no doubt meant to be controversial cause controversy sales papers. Two birds with one stone.
I also believe The publishers and writer were well aware that there could be a negative effect on legal gun owners. Why else did they leave there own names off the list/map, as the writer and at least one of the publishers have been reported to have hand gun permits and we assume are also legal gun owners?
If I believe my neighbor is acting erratic enough that I fear they may harm themselves or some one else I would report them to 911 and I have done so. I consider that action to have been in self defense, and for a genuine concern for my neighbors (who I care about) well being.
I didn't know about that additional information re the publishers leaving their own names off. Makes it even more egregious.
Your last paragraph is pretty much what I was suggesting, but I was asking whether some form of registry for all weapons would make sense. I raised this question not because I feel it must be done in a particular way but because I could see some scenarios where it could be a way to deter a mass murder. In thinking about it, I would be okay with a registry of all weapons that only law enforcement could access. As long as I knew that somebody was putting two and two together to identify someone giving seriousl signals of violence, that would work. Doesn't have to be a private citizen doing the dot connecting. If it was law enforcement accessible only, would that change anybody's mind here about a universal registry? Just curious...