This time it seems that the gun grabbers in Washington state have never read the Constitution.
Just for reference, here are the 2nd and 4th Amendments:
2nd:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
4th:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Yet, Democrats in Washington state have proposed legislation that would categorize any weapon as an "assault weapon" that doesn't fit their criteria. A standard pistol with anything more than 10 rounds would be an "assault weapon".
If any gun owners have something classified as an "assault weapon", then the local police will be allowed to enter your home at any time, without a warrant, and check to see if the weapon is safely secured.
It seems curious that Democrats in Washington state would think that the best way to violate the 2nd amendment would be to violate the 4th amendment as well.
http://www.examiner.com/article/washington-gun-control-proposal-said-to-violate-fourth-amendment-to-constitution
http://www.examiner.com/article/wash-state-bill-would-make-almost-all-gun-owners-criminals
If you are still living in the District of Columbia, you know that there are no private car inspections- you have to take your car to the DC run inspection station on Half Street and wait in line all morning until a couple of affirmative action employees finally get around to inspecting it.
Now, when this happens to you, do you scream? “I want to see your warrant.” And when they say “what are you taking about ,white boy,” do you say “you are violating my Fourth Amendment rights?
I didn’t think so. And the reason is because the inspection of your car for safety defects at a specified time and place is not unreasonable. You will no doubt remove all contraband from your car before you take it in for inspection.
See the problem?. Now read the Fourth Amendment again. It does not say no search without a warrant does it? It only prohibits the government from UNREASONABLE searches.
That is why DC does not need a warrant to inspect your car. Or demand to see a warrant the next time you are walking thu security at the airport. See if you get anything other than arrested.
This exemplary legislation – which, by the way. is based on Great Britain’s gun control law (gotta love Great Britain sign) - authorizes an inspection at a specified place only once a year. Now the drafters messed up because they forgot to add “inspection is permitted only following receipt of notice from the sheriff of the time the inspection will take place. The inspection is limited strictly to the gun storage facilities.”
This will probably be added in an amended version of the bill, or certainly by regulations once the law is passed. Further they will make you consent to inspection when you get your gun permit.
No Fourth Amendment violation here, just some poor drafting on the first pass.
Now go get your car inspected.
But I'm living in the state of Virginia, so I can do that just about anywhere.
Of course, getting your car inspected is a whole lot different than the cops being able to search your home whenever the fuck they want to see if you're storing your guns they way they see fit.
It seems to me that you have an entirely different consideration when we're talking about a privately owned gun being in your home vs. an automobile which is used (and only used) in public.
Did I mention that car ownership isn't a right enbodied in the US Constitution?
Now, correct me if I'm wrong here, but how does one determine what is "reasonable" and what is "unreasonable". The police don't get to search my car if they stop me unless they have a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, right? Say they pull me over and smell pot smoke coming from the car, then they can search my car. It seems to me that one must have evidence of a crime having been committed before one can enter your car or your home.
Now, on what basis, can one possibly say that it is reasonable to allow the police to search your home whenever the fuck they feel like it, without a warrant, simply for exercising your RIGHT to own a gun?
I could be wrong, but I thought vehicle "saftey" inspections are only neccesary when purchasing a used vehicle.
Are you using vehicle emissons testing as an example? That has nothing to do with vehicle saftey.
Privately owned/not-for-hire vehicles must pass emissions inspections every two years. Owners are reminded that their vehicles remain subject to the laws of the District of Columbia and must fulfill safe, legal vehicle operation standards under the DC Law. Commercial vehicles are subject to safety and emissions inspections every year, and vehicles-for-hire, such as limousines and taxicabs, are inspected for safety, emission and DCTC requirements every six months.
http://dmv.dc.gov/service/vehicle-inspection-renewal
-- Modified on 2/19/2013 5:23:52 PM
Every state I have live in has required me to have my vehicle inspected on a yearly or bi-yearly basis. They check the basic systems necessary for safe operation of the automobile. One time I failed inspection because my windshield wiper blades did not work properly. So that is why I called it a "safety" inspection.
In recent years, the states in which I have lived have also required an emissions inspection. That one I believe has to do with pollution rather than safety, although they may check for carbon monoxide emissions as well. But if you take your car down to Half Street they will definitely check for more than emissions for your inspection.
Are you using vehicle emissons testing as an example? That has nothing to do with vehicle saftey.
Privately owned/not-for-hire vehicles must pass emissions inspections every two years. Owners are reminded that their vehicles remain subject to the laws of the District of Columbia and must fulfill safe, legal vehicle operation standards under the DC Law. Commercial vehicles are subject to safety and emissions inspections every year, and vehicles-for-hire, such as limousines and taxicabs, are inspected for safety, emission and DCTC requirements every six months.
http://dmv.dc.gov/service/vehicle-inspection-renewal
-- Modified on 2/19/2013 5:23:52 PM
In Maryland, I know all states are different. that's crazy having to have your personal vehicle inspected for proper mechanical operation every two years.
We have vehicle emissions testing, I think it's bi-anual as long as no dash lights are on, and no fluids are leaking out. The only thing they do is hook their computer to the OBD ll port.
Question: Is Half Street conducting an ilegal inspection, if they go beyond emissions testing?
I doubt they can be sued, but is it legal for them to check other things, other than emissions?
-- Modified on 2/19/2013 7:03:37 PM
Do you suppose they overlooked horses, mules and wagons?
Odd that the state I live in has no concealed carry permission law, some of the most onerous firearm ownership laws yet does not require any sort of vehicle inspection.
Maybe somehow they think it all evens out.
The pendulum swings extreme on both sides. Too bad they can't find something reasonable in the center.
How can they make it a crime to introduce legislation? That is their job.
If something is wrong with a law that a legislative body has passed, it can be challenged and let the courts sort it out.
If this passes the courts will throw it out!
I guess it depends on how you look at it. If it was a law protecting your right to free speech or freedom from persecution, religious or otherwise?
I dont think its needed but what about making restrictions on ANY one of the bill of rights protections only possible by a popular vote? There are some things that I dont think legislators with a preconcieved adgenda should be in control of.
I could easily see that being overturned by state court before it ever got off the ground. It s simply not worth the time and effort it'd take, most people wouldnt register their guns for it anyway.