Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:12 AM
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Subject: Fw: Orwell's "1984" is here!
Orwell's "1984" is here!
The Leftists in Washington state tried to sneak through a law
that would allow law enforcement officials to annually inspect the homes of
assault-weapons owners to assure that they are "stored safely." Wonder
stored safely would be defined. If they are not stored safely would the
owner be fined or his weapon confiscated? Also, under the proposed law,
the owner could face a penalty of one-year in jail for refusing law enforcement
to inspect your home. While this is a clear violation of our second and
fourth amendment rights, it did not stop the Leftists from including it in the
Washington Legislature's gun law. This tipping of their intent makes it
apparent for all to see that the ultimate goal of the Leftists is to confiscate
the guns of citizens. Will they be caught the next time their hands are in
the cookie jar?
Mistake in gun bill
could defeat the effort
By Danny
WestneatSeattle Times staff columnist
One of the major gun-control efforts in Olympia this session calls for the sheriff to inspect the homes of assault-weapon owners. The bill’s backers say that was a mistake.
Forget police drones flying over your house. How about police coming inside, once a year, to have a look around?
As Orwellian as that sounds, it isn’t hypothetical. The notion of police home inspections was introduced in a bill last week in Olympia.
That it’s part of one of the major gun-control efforts pains me. It seemed in recent weeks lawmakers might be headed toward some common-sense regulation of gun sales. But then last week they went too far. By mistake, they claim. But still too far.
“They always say, we’ll never go house to house to take your guns away. But then you see this, and you have to wonder.”
That’s no gun-rights absolutist talking, but Lance Palmer, a Seattle trial lawyer and self-described liberal who brought the troubling Senate Bill 5737 to my attention. It’s the long-awaited assault-weapons ban, introduced last week by three Seattle Democrats.
(Note to readers: The link above is to a new version of SB 5737, which no longer contains the disputed provision. The original version of the bill has been erased from the state’s Web site, but here you can see it as it was proposed.)
Responding to the Newtown school massacre, the bill would ban the sale of semi-automatic weapons that use detachable ammunition magazines. Clips that contain more than 10 rounds would be illegal.
But then, with respect to the thousands of weapons like that already owned by Washington residents, the bill says this:
“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall ... safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.”
In other words, come into homes without a warrant to poke around. Failure to comply could get you up to a year in jail.
“I’m a liberal Democrat I’ve voted for only one Republican in my life,” Palmer told me. “But now I understand why my right-wing opponents worry about having to fight a government takeover.”
He added: “It’s exactly this sort of thing that drives people into the arms of the NRA.”
I have been blasting the NRA for its paranoia in the gun-control debate. But Palmer is right you can’t fully blame them, when cops going door-to-door shows up in legislation.
I spoke to two of the sponsors. One, Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, a lawyer who typically is hyper-attuned to civil-liberties issues, said he did not know the bill authorized police searches because he had not read it closely before signing on.
“I made a mistake,” Kline said. “I frankly should have vetted this more closely.”
That lawmakers sponsor bills they haven’t read is common. Still, it’s disappointing on one of this political magnitude. Not counting a long table, it’s only an eight-page bill.
The prime sponsor, Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, also condemned the search provision in his own bill, after I asked him about it. He said Palmer is right that it’s probably unconstitutional.
“I have to admit that shouldn’t be in there,” Murray said.
He said he came to realize that an assault-weapons ban has little chance of passing this year anyway. So he put in this bill more as “a general statement, as a guiding light of where we need to go.” Without sweating all the details.
Later, a Senate Democratic spokesman blamed unnamed staff and said a new bill will be introduced.
Murray had alluded at a gun-control rally in January that progress on guns could take years.
“We will only win if we reach out and continue to change the hearts and minds of Washingtonians,” Murray said. “We can attack them, or start a dialogue.”
Good plan, very bad start. What’s worse, the case for the perfectly reasonable gun-control bills in Olympia just got tougher.
Posts
2 comments:
I like how this gets twisted.
While noting that the home inspections are going too far (and I agree with him....and even with you bozos) Westneat also thinks gun control is common sense, just like 90% of the country.
Yet you conveniently ignore that and cater to your incipient paranoia. Why so paranoid, I wonder?
Well, I don't really wonder.
Personally, I think it's because you've doubled-down so hard that you have no way to back out with anything remotely resembling dignity and reason.
Thus, the eternal squawking.
As long as they have their priorities straight on what amendments they want to protect. (Watch to the end.) I'm glad that is it only that left that wants to erode the constitution via modest proposal.
Post a Comment