Gun Owners got letters

[unique]

"there were 60 owners of .40 cal guns in the area, and yes, they were all going to be check out"

No there were 60 folks who had purchased or transfered .40 caliber guns that they had records for.
Anyone who moved into the area who already had the firearm would not be in the records.

Anyone who had a gun illegally would not be in the records.

By the way Mrs Ratcatcher 55 said she would take my gun down for testing if I didn't.  So much for my position.

Thank you Mrs. Ratcatcher55.
It's not that I don't understand, or for the most part agree with you and the other posters,it's just that "what iffing" while in moderation is good and keeps us alive, can also immobilize us.  Maybe it won't do any good, maybe the government will do something bad with the information, or maybe one of the people who didn't take his/her gun in was the shooter and those who did just narrowed down the investigation.
I think there are times, like this one, when you have to do what you think is the right thing and not worry about the "what ifs".
You can never predict the consequences or repercussions of your actions, and yes, you can think you're doing the right thing and be totally wrong.
It's just me, I'd rather act and be wrong than play it safe and do nothing.

[tumblebug]

 ALWAY'S ready to help catch a DIRT BAG like that. Slippery slope indeed.

[ratcatcher55]

"It's just me, I'd rather act and be wrong than play it safe and do nothing."

I hear you.

[tombogan03884]

I don't like the idea of being told "Bring your pistol down and prove your innocence" this flies in the face of the constitutional assumption of innocence until proven guilty, I also don't approve of those sort of lowlifes in particular, so I would probably have shown up. The only WRONG decision is NO decision.

[MikeO]

I'm a little uncomfortable w where this is coming from, and why, as well as where it might go, and why.

It could help, but it's not very likely.

The gun and shooter may not be local. The gun may have been bought, sold, traded, or stolen outside the local area or time window. What if it's somebody who used an extra Glock .40 bbl in a Glock 357? Maybe everybody in the country who sells 40 bbls for Glocks should check their records and voluntarily give the names to the local law?

Taking your gun in does not necessarily help them catch the right bad guy unless you did it and you bring your gun in, it just helps them eliminate a lot of the wrong good guys they shouldn't even be looking at in the first place w/o probable cause.

If the girls had been molested, or drugs had ben found at the scene, would every swinging Tom, Dick, and Harry in the county be asked to voluntarily spit, piss, or jerk off in a cup?

Imagine how usefull it would be to LE if eveybody underwent periodic drug testing, and everybody had blood, hair, fingerprint, and DNA samples on file!? We all did that voluntarily?

Imagine how usefull it would be if every time there is a burglary or robbery, we all volunteered to let 'em come in and look around the place, go thorough our pockets, and check our bank accounts just to be sure we don't have the loot...

So, are you going to volunteer all that info for every crime just in case? Just the serious cases? Why not?

[Sponsor]

[unique]

MikeO.  It's not that I disagree with you. It's just that I think you have to make decisions on a case by case basis, and temper the "what ifs" with reality.
In this specific case, I think it's worth the risk, the next one?  I'll decide then.
I have a problem with "what ifs".  Mainly that they don't have to be realistic or fair, they are constructed by the author to prove his/her case.
Here is an example that is totally unfair and wrong of me to use, and I apologize in advance for using it;
"What if" it was your daughter?
PLEASE don't take that as a personal shot, I used it for two reasons, one, I have a problem with "what ifs" and second, we get so concerned with protecting our guns, we tend to forget there are other people in this world who are not after our guns and may sometime need our help.  I just can't cover my ears and chant "no, no, no"
 I'm heading out for the weekend, so I'll miss where this post goes

[MikeO]

Yep, the slope can get silly as well as slippery...

My daughter? I'll ask, but if you refuse I am not gonna lynch you.

I'm not just worried about my guns, I am worried about the rest of my civil rights too. That's why we have laws, courts, and cops: to cover the what if's and temper the nanny/vigilante reflex and protect you from me and the govt, and me from you and the govt. Registering your gun/case can be handy. So can registering your fingerprints and DNA.

I do not have a problem w them asking. I have a problem w the reaction to any refusal to volunteer info not required by law w/o probable cause.

They can ask, and I may give. If I refuse, they better have more than that to force the issue/make me a "person of interest" or it's going to cost them.

All that's necessary for evil to win is for good people to do nothing. Or the wrong thing for the right reason, or the right thing for the wrong reason?

[kmitch200]

It's just that I think you have to make decisions on a case by case basis, and temper the "what ifs" with reality.
In this specific case, I think it's worth the risk, the next one?  I'll decide then.

There's the problem... 
You may not have any choice the next time.

If you give away your rights, you don't be shocked when you don't have them anymore.   

We've seen this movie....
 
Did they get warrants for this? 
How would you get a warrant saying that this gun came from this area rather than from TimBucToo, and we want to see all your 4473s??? 
Did the FFL's give up the information voluntarily?

LEO walks into gun shop and says "Give me list of everyone who owns a Glock 40."
From what time frame?? The FFL is going to give the particulars of any Glock 40 they have seen, smelled or heard since introduction?

No FFL I know is just going to give out ANYTHING without a solid paper trail supporting it.

So where did this list of names come from?

 

[DesertMarine]

There is probably a better way for the .40 owners to prove their innocence.  Seems like we have gone from presumption of innocence to a presumption of gulit with the suspect having to prove innocence.   Cases of sexual harrazment and now sexual crimes a person is considered guilty until proven innocent.  But then again we no longer have a justice system but rather a legal system that is geared towards definitions of words and terms.

Hope they find whoever committed those acts and fry them or put them to sleep humanely like they did the girls.

[twyacht]

Mayve I'm being naive, but when has a criminal, let alone one who really is the "scum of the earth" ever adhered to ANY gun law?

This sounds like a back door attempt to get gun info on the "good" guys.

No punk murderer is going to "go downtown" and submit to any test. He'll end up on America's Most Wanted, and hopefully resist and "taken care of" by LEO's.

It opens up constitutional arguments, and my right as a law abiding civilian to PRIVACY!

Citizens who want to voluntarily furnish info, fine. Knowing I'm innocent, they can come and talk to me.

I can see the headlines now; "Gang related shooting using a 9mm, all 9mm owners within 5 miles please report to the nearest LEO office. The ATF has your records and knows who you are."  Post it on the coffee shops and, grocery stores, and 6 o'clock news.

See how BAD it could get.? Some in this country want this to happen. IMHO, (They can f*** off).