1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Sheriff to inspect homes of assault-weapon owners

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by GW22, Feb 18, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GW22

    GW22 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,246
    Yep, that's what the whackos in WA are proposing.

    By the way, what exactly is an "assault weapon"? I was in NY a month ago when a Ruger 10-22 or Mark I/II/II pistol suddenly became an assault weapon under the law.

    This is why we must beat back the attack on our Constitutionally guaranteed rights at any cost.

    -Gary
     
  2. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,696
    I read this whole bill twice. I seen where you must store and secure the pre- ban purchased "Assault" weapons. I did NOT however see anywhere in this bill that the Sheriff is to inspect homes a maximum of once a year, as described in the article.

    Can anyone else find that section describing the "Sheriff to inspect homes of assault weapons owners"? Click on Senate Bill 5737 in the article.
     
  3. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    If you read the article with the quotes of the originators and their mistake and the bill was "revised",,,,,,,should give anyone an idea that you are looking at the fixed bill........

    "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."
     
  4. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    It shouldn't have been in there, but it was, and these Democrat fools did not catch it BECAUSE THEY NEVER EVEN READ THE BILL THEY SPONSORED!!!!

    Someone just put an anti-gun bill in front of them and they jumped on board.

    Nine pages and they could not even read it!

    We need better representation than these idiots who can't even take the time to do their jobs correctly.
     
  5. Don Steele

    Don Steele Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,536
    Location:
    Florida's beautiful E. Coast
    I'm not for one freakin' second believing this bunch of crap-o-la about "they didn't know it was in there", or even the incredibly pathetic excuse:"I didn't read it".
    Pure unadulterated B.S.
    Soooo...we're to believe that a VERY short, 8 or 9 pg. LAW is proposed addressing one of the most white-hot topics of the day, and neither these legislators nor anyone on their staff read through it..?????
    Are you REALLY believing that...?????
    A much more plausible scenario is they knew EXACTLY what was in it, and were simply shocked...shocked...(thank you Claude Rains)when citizens(subjects in their minds) looked at it and actually had the temerity to object.
     
  6. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Frankly it would not surprise me either way. I think it's been acceptable for these clods to sign anything put under their nose as long as their staff assures them it's in the best interest of liberalism and will get them votes.

    And if they did read it, then they have a callous disregard for even more civil rights.
     
  7. Don Steele

    Don Steele Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,536
    Location:
    Florida's beautiful E. Coast
    We proceed at our own peril if we continue to believe liberal legislators are "ignorant", "idiots", "buffoons", etc,etc. It is deceptively easy to "write-off" these radical proposals as kooky-left-wing fringe ideas. I wish that were the case. I'm old enough to have noticed that what USED TO BE kooky left-wing-fringe proposals have a disturbing way of continually coming up...year after year, continually being "mainstreamed" by a complicit media, until we wake up and find they have become "the Norm".
    I'm old enough to remember when Richard Nixon raised a huge firestorm from the liberals when he wanted law enforcement to be able to enter a residence without knocking first.
    Fast forward to today...and those same liberals are perfectly fine with their chosen one murdering American citizens with drone strikes without a shred of due process.
     
  8. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    "...when citizens(subjects in their minds)..."

    exactly.
     
  9. stokinpls

    stokinpls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,482
    Hope and Change is here.
     
  10. Catpower

    Catpower Molon Labe TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,230
    Location:
    In the Cabana
    I agree with Don on this they knew exactly what was in the bill but then acted ignorant about it when they were caught

    They know exactly what they want and that is total control
     
  11. timberfaller

    timberfaller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,946
    Location:
    Eastern Washington
    If you think the East coast Democrat are stupid, The West coast ones are decades ahead of them!!!

    http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/02/democrats-sponsor-bill-allowing-in-home-inspections-of-gun-owners-2494644.html?utm_medium=facebook-share&utm_term=http%3A%2F%2Fawe.sm%2FcDQyl&utm_campaign=&utm_content=awesm-publisher&utm_source=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2F


    Wow, here is copy and paste web site for ya!!

    Someone smarter then I, can probably get it to work as a link! thanks!
     
  12. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,696
    Try this.
     
  13. wolfram

    wolfram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,258
    I can't imagine any SO having the resources to actually do this. Think about it, if your Sherriff did 20 inspections per day every day of the year, thats only 7300 inspections and then he has to start all over. How many ARs are out there?

    Also it could result in a bunch of gun fights that shouldn't have happened.
     
  14. shot410ga

    shot410ga Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,760
    The Gestapo and the Nazi's didn't require search warrants. Is this where we are headed?
     
  15. BT-100dc

    BT-100dc Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,487
    No one should tolerate police, government investigator, forcing an in-house inspection unless having a search warrant. Isn't this a type of unreasonable search? BT100dc
     
  16. GW22

    GW22 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,246
    An older gentleman on this forum once PMd me:

    "Don't worry, Gary - you can rest assured that he who comes for mine will not be coming for yours."

    I hope his home is the first one they invade.

    -Gary
     
  17. TinMan88

    TinMan88 TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    979
    This is all over (some) radio broadcasts in the Seattle area. It was noted that the sherrif would need a list of who's door on which to knock.

    It can't be too tough to imagine the danger a law such as this would put the Sherrif or deputy in. Put Ed Murray as first guy in. He might think harder before he proposes such a law.
    tinman88_2008_0303156.jpg
     
  18. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Don, don't overlook the infamous line that you have to vote on it to know what's in it.
     
  19. Don Steele

    Don Steele Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,536
    Location:
    Florida's beautiful E. Coast
    Keep in mind folks.....
    As ugly as this provision appears, once you agree to REGISTER your firearms, all they have to do is make this kind of warrantless INSPECTION ( it's not a SEARCH...it's an inspection) a condition of your permit. In other words...when you apply for the permit to own the firearm(s) in question, you AGREE in advance that you allow your premises to be inspected for compliance.
    It's a very common condition in any number of areas where a government permit or license is required.
     
  20. GW22

    GW22 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,246
    Every gun owner in America should be sure to soak in Don Steele's excellent point.

    -Gary
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.