gun-control efforts calls for sheriff to inspect gun owner's homes

[Truthmatters]

guys quit derailing the thread

 

[martybegan]

guys quit derailing the thread

its not even your thread, so FOAD.

 

[Truthmatters]

I wasn't trying to insult you. I was just asking a question. It just seems to me that you are so uninformed on the subject Constitutional Law that it's difficult for you to contribute to an intelligent conversation on the matter.
In addition, I find your misspellings and lack of punctuation indicative of someone who hasn't had the benefit of a decent education.
That's why I asked if you were maybe in the 3rd grade.

You with all your blather and superiority will comply with the gun laws this country deems to be the laws.


why do you keep trying to change the subject?

 

[Truthmatters]

guys quit derailing the thread

its not even your thread, so FOAD.

the mods didnt make the rules that way did they?

 

[Truthmatters]

here is what the gun snugglers need to get perfectly straight.

Gun ban laws are perfectly constitutional.

Its ONLY unconstitutional to ban ALL arms.

get it

 

[Wry Catcher]

I will bet that the only mistake here was that it was published before it was voted on.

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.
As Orwellian as that sounds, it isn’t hypothetical. The notion of police home inspections was introduced in a bill last week in Olympia.
Misstep in gun bill could defeat the effort | Local News | The Seattle Times

Within the link is this 'offending' paragraph:

“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.”

I have no doubt this paragraph would not stand the test of Constitutionality. That said, all firearms should be stored safely and the owner should be required by law to do so and to carry liability insurance. If one or both of these provisions were enacted into law, gun owners would be civilly liable for an harm caused by their gun, used by anyone. It is all about personal responsibility, isn't it?

 

[Truthmatters]

when the majority of this country decides they dont want you to own a certain type of weapondry you will comply with that law.

If you dont then you will be in big trouble.

get it

 

[martybegan]

I will bet that the only mistake here was that it was published before it was voted on.

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.
As Orwellian as that sounds, it isn’t hypothetical. The notion of police home inspections was introduced in a bill last week in Olympia.
Misstep in gun bill could defeat the effort | Local News | The Seattle Times

Within the link is this 'offending' paragraph:

“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.”

I have no doubt this paragraph would not stand the test of Constitutionality. That said, all firearms should be stored safely and the owner should be required by law to do so and to carry liability insurance. If one or both of these provisions were enacted into law, gun owners would be civilly liable for an harm caused by their gun, used by anyone. It is all about personal responsibility, isn't it?

Why do you want to price poor people out of being able to own firearms and exercise a consitutional right?

 

[martybegan]

when the majority of this country decides they dont want you to own a certain type of weapondry you will comply with that law.

If you dont then you will be in big trouble.

get it

Rights are immune from the tyranny of the majority. If this were not the case, why can't Mississipi ban abortions if a majority decide they want to?

 

[NoNukes]

Yeah, keep telling yourselves that. We get the ones that want to improve themselves and take a risk. you get the ones that want to stay on the dole as long as possible.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Why does that not surprise me?

I have a very good idea, I hang out with Irish immigrants all the time, my sister is married to one. While you guys had a boom 6 years ago, its gone. We get the people who want to risk something to come here, that step alone is enough to keep the dregs from trying it.

You have spent no time in Ireland and have no idea what you are talking about. You listen to the people who could not make it here and run to the United States. There are still many people starting their own businesses and roughing it out through the recession. You speak of the Irish with quite a racist tone like everyone here is on the dole and living off of the government. The country is still being built up, not that far from when it was a third world country. Do not speak poorly of people if you are ignorant of them and their country. If Irish people were on this board criticizing America and Americans, you would be the first person to put them in their place.

 

[Papawx3]

when the majority of this country decides they dont want you to own a certain type of weapondry you will comply with that law.

If you dont then you will be in big trouble.

get it

I'm sorry I said 3rd grade. I don't think you've gotten quite that far. So, shouldn't you be in school right now?

 

[martybegan]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Why does that not surprise me?

I have a very good idea, I hang out with Irish immigrants all the time, my sister is married to one. While you guys had a boom 6 years ago, its gone. We get the people who want to risk something to come here, that step alone is enough to keep the dregs from trying it.

You have spent no time in Ireland and have no idea what you are talking about. You listen to the people who could not make it here and run to the United States. There are still many people starting their own businesses and roughing it out through the recession. You speak of the Irish with quite a racist tone like everyone here is on the dole and living off of the government. The country is still being built up, not that far from when it was a third world country. Do not speak poorly of people if you are ignorant of them and their country. If Irish people were on this board criticizing America and Americans, you would be the first person to put them in their place.

Considering i'm 1/2 irish descent, racism is kind of a misplaced accusation on your part.

This is what those who have come here are telling me, its what those who left here during the Irish mini boom, and are now stuck there due to the "10 year ban" are telling me.

Are all people in Ireland on the dole? of course not. Your problem is the ratio of decent working people to lazy bastards is slipping towards the lazy bastards side of the equation. Even if its only 10% thats about 7% too much to maintain an economy or a standard of living.

If my friends and relatives "can't hack it" then why do they own thier own businesses here? Or thier own bars? Or work 50 hours a week in skilled trades such as construction?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I will bet that the only mistake here was that it was published before it was voted on.

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.
As Orwellian as that sounds, it isn’t hypothetical. The notion of police home inspections was introduced in a bill last week in Olympia.
Misstep in gun bill could defeat the effort | Local News | The Seattle Times

Within the link is this 'offending' paragraph:

“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.”

I have no doubt this paragraph would not stand the test of Constitutionality. That said, all firearms should be stored safely and the owner should be required by law to do so and to carry liability insurance. If one or both of these provisions were enacted into law, gun owners would be civilly liable for an harm caused by their gun, used by anyone. It is all about personal responsibility, isn't it?

Why do you want to price poor people out of being able to own firearms and exercise a consitutional right?

Clearly all poor people are irresponsible and as such are incapable of exercising the necessary personal responsibilty of gun ownership. But thank you Marty, your opinion is always 'interesting'.***
















***sarcasm alert

 

[martybegan]

Within the link is this 'offending' paragraph:

“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.”

I have no doubt this paragraph would not stand the test of Constitutionality. That said, all firearms should be stored safely and the owner should be required by law to do so and to carry liability insurance. If one or both of these provisions were enacted into law, gun owners would be civilly liable for an harm caused by their gun, used by anyone. It is all about personal responsibility, isn't it?

Why do you want to price poor people out of being able to own firearms and exercise a consitutional right?

Clearly all poor people are irresponsible and as such are incapable of exercising the necessary personal responsibilty of gun ownership. But thank you Marty, your opinion is always 'interesting'.***


{douchebag spacing eliminated}

***sarcasm alert

Well if insurance for thier firearms in unaffordable, what are they supposed to do? You are setting having the insurance as part of owning a gun. Nevermind that this is "infringement," what are they supposed to do?

Why are you making poor people decide between putting food on the table or being able to defend themselves?

Answer the question if you have the conviction to do so (which I doubt).

 

[NoNukes]

I have a very good idea, I hang out with Irish immigrants all the time, my sister is married to one. While you guys had a boom 6 years ago, its gone. We get the people who want to risk something to come here, that step alone is enough to keep the dregs from trying it.

You have spent no time in Ireland and have no idea what you are talking about. You listen to the people who could not make it here and run to the United States. There are still many people starting their own businesses and roughing it out through the recession. You speak of the Irish with quite a racist tone like everyone here is on the dole and living off of the government. The country is still being built up, not that far from when it was a third world country. Do not speak poorly of people if you are ignorant of them and their country. If Irish people were on this board criticizing America and Americans, you would be the first person to put them in their place.

Considering i'm 1/2 irish descent, racism is kind of a misplaced accusation on your part.

This is what those who have come here are telling me, its what those who left here during the Irish mini boom, and are now stuck there due to the "10 year ban" are telling me.

Are all people in Ireland on the dole? of course not. Your problem is the ratio of decent working people to lazy bastards is slipping towards the lazy bastards side of the equation. Even if its only 10% thats about 7% too much to maintain an economy or a standard of living.

If my friends and relatives "can't hack it" then why do they own thier own businesses here? Or thier own bars? Or work 50 hours a week in skilled trades such as construction?

Those telling you this are the ones taking the easy way out by going to America or Australia. Some do it for the life experience and return to Ireland. You made the statement that the productive ones come to America. Many of the productive ones stay here, start businesses or get involved with businesses that others have begun. Do not believe everything that you hear from those who have left Ireland, and do not think that you know the country because of it.

By your way of thinking, the productive Mexicans have come to America while the dregs have stayed in Mexico to live in poverty. Remember this, there are many Irish living in the United States illegally.

 

[martybegan]

You have spent no time in Ireland and have no idea what you are talking about. You listen to the people who could not make it here and run to the United States. There are still many people starting their own businesses and roughing it out through the recession. You speak of the Irish with quite a racist tone like everyone here is on the dole and living off of the government. The country is still being built up, not that far from when it was a third world country. Do not speak poorly of people if you are ignorant of them and their country. If Irish people were on this board criticizing America and Americans, you would be the first person to put them in their place.

Considering i'm 1/2 irish descent, racism is kind of a misplaced accusation on your part.

This is what those who have come here are telling me, its what those who left here during the Irish mini boom, and are now stuck there due to the "10 year ban" are telling me.

Are all people in Ireland on the dole? of course not. Your problem is the ratio of decent working people to lazy bastards is slipping towards the lazy bastards side of the equation. Even if its only 10% thats about 7% too much to maintain an economy or a standard of living.

If my friends and relatives "can't hack it" then why do they own thier own businesses here? Or thier own bars? Or work 50 hours a week in skilled trades such as construction?

Those telling you this are the ones taking the easy way out by going to America or Australia. Some do it for the life experience and return to Ireland. You made the statement that the productive ones come to America. Many of the productive ones stay here, start businesses or get involved with businesses that others have begun. Do not believe everything that you hear from those who have left Ireland, and do not think that you know the country because of it.

By your way of thinking, the productive Mexicans have come to America while the dregs have stayed in Mexico to live in poverty. Remember this, there are many Irish living in the United States illegally.

How is risking everything including deportation "taking the easy way out?"

And yes, alot of Irish immigrants are illegal, the difference is they speak the language, have no issue assimilating into american culture and more often than not come here with a viable skill.

The limits on Irish immigration are set far to low. We want people like that coming here.

Mexican immegration is different, due to the ease of crossing the border. What we get from mexico are largely untrained uneducated workers, who are far more of a burden on our social structure than the Irish are.

To get here from ireland illegally, you need the means for a tourist visa, and a flight or a boat trip. you also are admittedly not leaving a hellhole such as mexico.

To leave mexico you need to walk and hop a fence or swim.

 

[NoNukes]

Considering i'm 1/2 irish descent, racism is kind of a misplaced accusation on your part.

This is what those who have come here are telling me, its what those who left here during the Irish mini boom, and are now stuck there due to the "10 year ban" are telling me.

Are all people in Ireland on the dole? of course not. Your problem is the ratio of decent working people to lazy bastards is slipping towards the lazy bastards side of the equation. Even if its only 10% thats about 7% too much to maintain an economy or a standard of living.

If my friends and relatives "can't hack it" then why do they own thier own businesses here? Or thier own bars? Or work 50 hours a week in skilled trades such as construction?

Those telling you this are the ones taking the easy way out by going to America or Australia. Some do it for the life experience and return to Ireland. You made the statement that the productive ones come to America. Many of the productive ones stay here, start businesses or get involved with businesses that others have begun. Do not believe everything that you hear from those who have left Ireland, and do not think that you know the country because of it.

By your way of thinking, the productive Mexicans have come to America while the dregs have stayed in Mexico to live in poverty. Remember this, there are many Irish living in the United States illegally.

How is risking everything including deportation "taking the easy way out?"

And yes, alot of Irish immigrants are illegal, the difference is they speak the language, have no issue assimilating into american culture and more often than not come here with a viable skill.

The limits on Irish immigration are set far to low. We want people like that coming here.

Mexican immegration is different, due to the ease of crossing the border. What we get from mexico are largely untrained uneducated workers, who are far more of a burden on our social structure than the Irish are.

To get here from ireland illegally, you need the means for a tourist visa, and a flight or a boat trip. you also are admittedly not leaving a hellhole such as mexico.

To leave mexico you need to walk and hop a fence or swim.

Are you still standing by your statement that America gets all of Ireland's productive citizens?

Are the Mexicans who come to America the productive ones?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why do you want to price poor people out of being able to own firearms and exercise a consitutional right?

Clearly all poor people are irresponsible and as such are incapable of exercising the necessary personal responsibilty of gun ownership. But thank you Marty, your opinion is always 'interesting'.***


{douchebag spacing eliminated}

***sarcasm alert

Well if insurance for thier firearms in unaffordable, what are they supposed to do? You are setting having the insurance as part of owning a gun. Nevermind that this is "infringement," what are they supposed to do?

Why are you making poor people decide between putting food on the table or being able to defend themselves?

Answer the question if you have the conviction to do so (which I doubt).

Poor people can safely secure a firearm at a cost much much less than the purchase of a firearm and ammunition; as for insurance, they won't need to buy insurance, but they will be held responsible for any tort. Notice I didn't even imply a criminal penalty and hell, with a gun they can shoot game or hold up the local mini-mart.

It does not infringe the right to bare arms. If you want to walk around your home looking like a gangster locked and loaded, or simply loaded, that's your absolute right. And when you leave your home you have the right to leave loaded weapons in plain sight, unlocked even if hidden; however, in doing so you assume liability and in CA such behavior makes you culpable for civil and criminal sanctions. If you don't have insurance you could suffer a catastrophic financial setback. It's all about personal responsibility.

 

[martybegan]

Those telling you this are the ones taking the easy way out by going to America or Australia. Some do it for the life experience and return to Ireland. You made the statement that the productive ones come to America. Many of the productive ones stay here, start businesses or get involved with businesses that others have begun. Do not believe everything that you hear from those who have left Ireland, and do not think that you know the country because of it.

By your way of thinking, the productive Mexicans have come to America while the dregs have stayed in Mexico to live in poverty. Remember this, there are many Irish living in the United States illegally.

How is risking everything including deportation "taking the easy way out?"

And yes, alot of Irish immigrants are illegal, the difference is they speak the language, have no issue assimilating into american culture and more often than not come here with a viable skill.

The limits on Irish immigration are set far to low. We want people like that coming here.

Mexican immegration is different, due to the ease of crossing the border. What we get from mexico are largely untrained uneducated workers, who are far more of a burden on our social structure than the Irish are.

To get here from ireland illegally, you need the means for a tourist visa, and a flight or a boat trip. you also are admittedly not leaving a hellhole such as mexico.

To leave mexico you need to walk and hop a fence or swim.

Are you still standing by your statement that America gets all of Ireland's productive citizens?

Are the Mexicans who come to America the productive ones?

You know what? I'll admit that was a bit of hyperbole. I have been posting on Truthmatters posts, and I guess some of my vitrol against her spilled over here.

No, we do not get all of your productive citizens. What we get are those who see not future in Ireland (or Europes for that matter) current economic situation. Those who see people living off the system, and really can't stand it.

What you get is an increased ratio of moochers to producers, a ratio that is not sustainable.

 

[martybegan]

Clearly all poor people are irresponsible and as such are incapable of exercising the necessary personal responsibilty of gun ownership. But thank you Marty, your opinion is always 'interesting'.***


{douchebag spacing eliminated}

***sarcasm alert

Well if insurance for thier firearms in unaffordable, what are they supposed to do? You are setting having the insurance as part of owning a gun. Nevermind that this is "infringement," what are they supposed to do?

Why are you making poor people decide between putting food on the table or being able to defend themselves?

Answer the question if you have the conviction to do so (which I doubt).

Poor people can safely secure a firearm at a cost much much less than the purchase of a firearm and ammunition; as for insurance, they won't need to buy insurance, but they will be held responsible for any tort. Notice I didn't even imply a criminal penalty and hell, with a gun they can shoot game or hold up the local mini-mart.

It does not infringe the right to bare arms. If you want to walk around your home looking like a gangster locked and loaded, or simply loaded, that's your absolute right. And when you leave your home you have the right to leave loaded weapons in plain sight, unlocked or hidden; however, in doing so you assume liability and in CA such behavior makes you culpable for civil and criminal sanctions. If you don't have insurance you could suffer a catastrophic financial setback. It's all about personal responsibility.

We already have a punishment for using a firearm irresponsibly, its called "criminal law"
Are you saying you intitally did not say "require insurance" for owning a firearm?

That said, all firearms should be stored safely and the owner should be required by law to do so and to carry liability insurance.

Also your suggestions would basically rewrite tort law as we see it. How is leaving a firearm in a locked house, and someone breaking in and stealing it irresponsible?

Actually its as usual, all about people like you trying another end run around the 2nd amendment.