Dream come true (sorta) ... gov't inspection of your home proposed

[chrish]

By 'sorta' I mean, I hope the Liberals and Progressives propose checking gun owners homes in every city, county, town, and state across the COUNTRY.

It would end this once and for all.

What a bunch of turds!

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020373291_westneat17xml.html

Glad there is at least 1 guy out there on the left that things this is a super bad idea. There is hope for them yet!

[Bawanna]

What I don't get is the guy that introduced the bill saying he's right, it's probably not constitutional.

The constitution say shall not infringe. So 10 round max is infringement. Taxing ammo is infringement.
Limiting sales in any way is infringement.

What am I missing here?

[downtownv]

You're thinking logical; They don't.... that's what you're missing!

[muggsy]

I have a feeling that the courts are going to be very busy and the lawyers are going to get very very rich, before all of this is over. The thing that really pisses me off is that it's the law abiding gun owning tax payers who will be paying for the governments legal fees in these cases. I think we should sue them to get our own money back. Does that make any sense? Never mind. I'm living in a country that I don't understand.

[Salty]

I thought this was just a joke at first. This position should be as big of a concern to the liberal left as it is to conservatives. if you can do it for guns other areas can follow just a quickly.

[Tinman507]

If they can't get to us through the 2A, they'll keep chipping away at 4A and others until there's nothing left.

I feel so bad for my kids and future grandkids. This country will not be what we grew up in. And it's our fault for allowing it.

[chrish]

Well, the country we all grew up in isn't the one of the 1800s either. While I don't want to fight off bands of indians to survive and deal with rampant diseases that have no known cure, thinking maybe I'd take that over where we are headed.

It's pretty obvious that THEY want to pick and choose what works for them and get rid of what doesn't. It's the way of the left, and sometimes the right. Kinda like what liberalism (and I don't mean Democrats, just liberalism/progressivism) has done to the Bible. Actually, really just modernism, lets throw out what we don't like, keep what we do, and call it Christianity.

Sad stuff. But at least for now, if they keep this up, it'll create division so deep and so wide they'll never climb there way out of it. Here's hoping! I'd like to just 'get along', but that ain't gonna happen I suppose.

[AIRret]

Don't you think legislators should proof read a bill before they submit it???
AND those who vote on it should read it first?!?!..........Oh wait, they find out what is in it
AFTER they vote on it!!

LORD things are unbelievably messed UP!!

[Armybrat]

And it gets worse for our fellow pro-Constitutionalists in Illinois - that extremist leftwingnut Chicago Police Superintendent McCarthy thinks we are all corrupt - an odd accusation from a Chicago hack:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/isra-chicago-police-superintendent-mccarthy-crosses-the-line-191588711.html

That jerk should move to North Korea....he'd fit right in there.

[chrish]

Crap, I'd be happy if they'd actually define what's in it to begin with before they vote on it, much less read it to see what's in it.

There has been some noise here lately (yet again) regarding legislators passing a 3 day wait to read legislation, particularly the BUDGET that is about as thick as a phone book. Nope, having not of it, from both sides of the aisle. They'd rather pass it after a couple hour 'summary' session where they are told the high points. Talk about idiots.

Maybe I should try that here at home. Honey, here is my new firearm budget for the year, just gonna buy some gun stuff, that's all you need to know. Don't worry about the cost or anything else we might need or whether we might over spend as a result.

[KoolBreeze]

Don't you think legislators should proof read a bill before they submit it???
AND those who vote on it should read it first?!?!..........Oh wait, they find out what is in it
AFTER they vote on it!!

LORD things are unbelievably messed UP!!

Yeah, I just don't get that. Why in the hell would any legislature ever vote for a bill, let alone sign on as a sponsor, that he had not read and fully understood? They'll say that there are so many bills that they can't possibly read them all. Well, I'm sorry but the people that put them there did so for representation. How can they represent anyone if they don't even know what they are voting for? They can blame it on the staffers all they want, but in the end the buck stops with their vote. I think any legislature that admits to not fully understanding any legislation prior to voting for it should be impeached, recalled, or whatever the process is in their state, immediately.

But a lot of them don't give 2 shits about the people they represent. All they care about is making the party and people lining their pockets with money happy.

[yqtszhj]

If they try to do that I think there will be a W*A*R. It wouldn't go over very well in a lot of places.

[chrish]

If they try to do that I think there will be a W*A*R. It wouldn't go over very well in a lot of places.

Oh yea, I agree. I more meant, try to pull it and see the political scene around them implode. Kinda like this article is alluding to. I'd like to see this legislation floated everywhere to put the kibosh on the whole thing. There are many folks on the other side of the aisle that if this were proposed they'd change their tune awfully quickly. I would hope anyway.

[MikeyKahr]

Comrades, please come see my Kalashnikovs while I get my papers. Can I get you some Vodka?

[muggsy]

If push comes to shove, I'm shovin'.

[7shot]

let them start searching all the gang related areas of the U.S.'s biggest cities first and see how far they get.

[Bawanna]

Chicago would be a excellent start.

[yqtszhj]

Chicago would be a excellent start.

There's no guns in Chicago. They're illegal there. :rolleyes: