I'd have to say no, when it comes to the question of whether or not my family would stone me to death. But the question did make me think about the "Societies" track record for making directives and then changing them years later and how that pattern would play out with a directive regarding the "stoning" of disobedient ones.
Back in the day when the old diehards were making up the doctrine, they'd probably have a convoluded explaination of what was and wasn't a stoning offense and who would be in charge of said stones. They'd research the stones of the bible lands and determine what they were made up of and what their typical size and weight would be. As a shrewd investment, they'd immediately locate and purchase a failing rock quarry in upstate New York ($$$). There would be an increase in gorey stoning illustrations in the literature and of experiences given on the assemby programs outling heartwarming stoning experiences.
Decades later when their quarry was almost mined out, they'd decide that that stoning was a conscience matter and that stone fragments (also called gravel) could be substituted for real stones.