2 ms·
Society considers it useful to have a sex offenders registry, like where they live, etc. I think gun owners are also a potential threat, ie. there is similar co
by trhway 4y ago
Society considers it useful to have a sex offenders registry, like where they live, etc. I think gun owners are also a potential threat, ie. there is similar compelling public interest, and thus I don't see why it should be treated differently. For example if a scum of a "law abiding gun owner" like Rittenhouse is living next door you definitely would like to know if it has a gun.
- scarmig 4y agoHow far does this go? Wouldn't it make just as much sense (or more) to post the PII (name, DOB, full address) of all people who have been convicted of a crime posted in a publicly searchable database? If you want to catch folks like Rittenhouse in that net, you could extend that database to every person who has ever been arrested or tried for a crime. This is clearly vindictive, just as much as the sex offender registry is 90%+ vindictive.
- b5n 4y agoWhat about victims of domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, etc. who have purchased a firearm and/or applied for CCW as a means to defend themselves? Will you explain to me the societal value in the government releasing their address in context with other PII to the general public?
- pensatoio 4y agoSex offenders are convicted criminals. You're saying convicted criminals of the most heinous crimes are equivalent to your neighbors who invoke a right that's existed in common law for centuries. I understand this is a highly contentious subject, but you're being divisive and ridiculous.
- trhway 4y agoRegistry isn't punishment. It is because they present threat. The same for guns as the threat level is similar.
- ultrarunner 4y agoLet's be real: registry is punishment. Some of those people were convicted of urinating in public. If anything continued ostracization precludes reform.