How many National Guard, LEO’s of City, County, State, FBI, DEA, CIA, FEMA, HS & TSA personal will be willing to actually do house to house searches for magazines, and/or scary weapons that suddenly are illegal to own?
Will any of the laws be applied to the a-fore-mentioned officers in regard their personal vs, duty arms? Or are they exempt? What about regular military personal who have homes, families, or personal possessions in the US?
IMO, their personal weapons should be addressed as are the regular civilians weapons.
Who will confiscate their personal weapons & how will we know for sure it has been done?
Do you think the bills that the congress is going to flood us with will apply to those mentioned above? Should they be?
We know the politicians will exempt themselves and their guards.
There’s already gun laws on the books, afaik the police doesn’t regularly do searches for illegal weapons. The laws are applied if you are caught with them or if there’s a reason for the police to search (ie you are suspected of breaking the law based on some info). I don’t see why you think this would change.
How about we wait and see if Congress actually passes something before engaging in ridiculous speculation about house to house searches that would obviously violate the Fourth Amendment?
Do you have your zombie avoidance plan in place? What about your plan for when the asteroid hits the moon and knocks it into our planet? Have you created a plan for what you’ll do if you realize that you’re suffering from severe and dangerous delusions, maybe?
At least one of those is likelier than the idea that politicians–who really really want to be re-elected–will pass a law that guarantees they won’t be re-elected, AND that judges within the judicial branch, who have spent their lives defending the constitution, will suddenly forget about the fourth amendment.
All of the above will be willing to do a house to house search, if ordered to do so. It is “the law”, and that is what their job is. Everybody wants to do a good job. The only consideration that the LEO would have is: “Am I missing a date with some hottie to bust this person? Will my career advance, or is Sgt. X leaving me with the excrement end of the stick while he is out on a date with some hottie?”
Otherwise, there would be no hesitance in the searches.
Sure. Because in all U.S. history, no cop has ever been a whistle-blower or stood up to denounce illegal activity within his department. (Dripping with sarcasm… And drawn butter…)
Hypothetical attempts to infringe upon 2nd amendment rights will not void our 4th amendment rights to unreasonable search and seizure. LEOs will still need to get a court ordered search warrant for probable cause.
These constitutional rights tend to be overlapping. The right to free speech and expression, the right to protect yourself from harm and possible tyranny, the right to be secure in your home against aggression and seizure of property by the State. These are part of the fundamental basis for the idea of the United States.
Congress will do what it does best; run in circles, scream and shout at each other, and then do little or probably nothing. This is their specialty.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that:
GusNSpot, can you please point to any proposed bill that would require massive search and seizure operations so extensive that they will require calling out the national guard?
I think the OP was saying “IF (somebody) changes (something) so extremely that it becomes fully legal and proper for (somebody) to go door-to-door confiscating handguns, how many LEO’s will say “fuck that”, how many will hide their own guns, etc.?”
Mucho grande handwaving in the middle there. It’s like saying “If the moon is found to be made of green cheese, what effect will that have on the dairy industry?”
I think if we had, say, several thousand spree shootings in the next few months, with tens of thousands of people dead, and they continued at that pace, then maybe, in a few years, Congress might be willing to consider some stricter laws on private ownership of handguns. Maybe. Then again, by that time, it’ll be election season again…
Great. My doorbell’s already ringing day and night from cops looking for counterfeit purses, heroin and kiddie porn. “Get your own,” I always say before slamming the door.
Just going on what Diane Fienstines gun bills are being proposed and a few others that they say they are proposing which indicates that they are running towards just such an event. As said above, would the LEO’s go along with it and what about their PERSONAL weapons, not the work weapons. Do you think they would be included. I really believe that any bill along these lines, the congress will pass a bill to exempt themselves just like they have for medical coverage and pay raises and retirement perks.
If you ( all you’s are generic in my posts ) are not going to even think about it until the bills become laws, enjoy the jokes.
I try to decide what I am willing to do before it is too late to change anything.
The only way anything like what you’re being paranoid about could happen would be if the overwhelming majority of the populace decided it was a good idea, and they’d go along with it. Private citizens, cops, politicians, everybody. They wouldn’t go door-to-door searching, because they wouldn’t have to: they’d just tell all the people “Hey, we’ve signed a bill saying you need to turn in your guns, just like you asked us to. Go!” and all the people who had decided it was a good idea would do it. The ones who hadn’t decided it was a good idea probably wouldn’t, and then they’d be the bad guys. But remember, nothing short of overwhelming support by the vast majority of gun owners would cause this to happen.
OK, let’s not wait for these bills to become laws. Can you cite any proposed bills that call for “house to house searches for magazines, and/or scary weapons that suddenly are illegal to own”?
Some police already refuse to enforce some gun laws. I used to live very close to a school. Before I moved in, I went to the police department and asked them about “gun free” school zones, and the chief (no less) told me flat out that his department did not and would not enforce that law. Granted, this was in New Hampshire.
What Oakminister is hinting at is that there aren’t any bills being proposed that would require the sort of confiscation efforts you are talking about. Most, if not all of the proposed legislation is prospective: it will bar the sale of such weapons, not possession of extant weapons.