Hmmm. My inclination is to say no. Why? For the same reasons of what SJ just said. BUT...on the other hand, not all muslims are murderers or extremists. Then again, the risk that one IS an extremist and has such a weapon in his hands...but then thats painting all of them with a very broad brush....however, is the glass half empty or half full?
Difficult question. I'm not sure how to answer because I just flat don't know the answer to it.
Really?
This is the easiest question you will ever have to answer - your religious beliefs are not subject to arbitrary governmental oversight - PERIOD.
Do you also want the constitution simply done away with?
The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
If we are doing (or allowing) something that is extremely dangerous and detrimental to the public safety, a way will be found to squash it.
Even if it means bending the rules a bit in order to shoehorn-in the legal mechanism(s) by which that squashing would be accomplished.
Why?
Because, when safety and Constitutionality are in conflict in times of extremis, safety wins, nearly every time.
Don't believe that?
Just ask the Japanese-Americans of our West Coast during the 1941-1945 time frame - still within Living Memory.
Or those incarcerated by the LIncoln Administration in the 1860s during the Civil War, after the suspension of habeus corpus, once the shooting started.
Shit happens.
We can continue to hope that that particular
type of shit does not manifest.
But we should not fool ourselves that The Nation and The People would not act, should the situation worsen to that point of extreme danger.