Spot Checks
-
I don't know Steve. The Ninth Amendment specifically says: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
In other words, the 9th says: you have all the explicit and implicit rights recognized in the Bill of Rights, but just because they're listed doesn't mean those are the only ones that are recognized. We are also allowed rights at birth. The Constitution protects rights of the people, but it isn't a charter listing all of our rights
The Third and Fourth Amendments also address one's right to privacy.
The 3rd says that the government may not quarter soldiers in your home.
The 4th says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."
I don't see how cops knocking on your door asking to look for weapons wouldn't be in conflict.
-
Do you need to start a new thread every time?
-
I've mentioned that multiple times in the past, Steve. frankly it's a good idea but you have to change the language of it because spot check sounds offensive what you need to say is inspection. There's a fire inspector right? He inspects businesses at least annually. Sometimes more. And he'll inspect your home at any renovation. Why? Because fires kill people. That's why there's a fire safety code. In Ohio its n.f.p.a. 72, and its like 300 pages long. Does that mean you can't have a fire? That you can't use a fire to keep your home warm? It does not.
-
There's no difference between an inspector checking your home for structural integrity, an inspector checking your home for fire compliance, and an inspector checking your home for firearms compliance.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Do you need to start a new thread every time?
Yes I do.
We tend to straight from the subject as threads go on, take the gun violence thread it's all over the place.
May I ask so what?
WSS
-
Bad idea and won't happen. Imagine a city like Chicago, millions of people. They are going to do 5 or 10 random checks? Don't make any sense. And like I said before, since they are random, how do they know anyone would be home? They going to schedule a 'random' check? No.
-
Yeah, I'm completely unwilling to go along with this idea. What exactly are they gonna check for, the owners being too black? Being a registered gun owner should NOT mean that you are submitting yourself to mandatory searches and potential seizures.
-
Bad idea and won't happen. Imagine a city like Chicago, millions of people. They are going to do 5 or 10 random checks? Don't make any sense. And like I said before, since they are random, how do they know anyone would be home? They going to schedule a 'random' check? No.
Bad idea and won't happen. Imagine a city like Chicago, millions of people. They are going to do 5 or 10 random checks? Don't make any sense. And like I said before, since they are random, how do they know anyone would be home? They going to schedule a 'random' check? No.
Oh I understand where you're coming from, die hard.
Ballpeen too.
Of course in Chicago you could do 50 or 100 a day.
But still constitutionally I don't think it's any more troublesome the the automobile laws.
If we are going to require guns be registered and licensed it becomes a privilege and a privilege can be regulated.
WSS
-
Other thoughts as to why this is a terrible idea:
You say it's a good use of police time? Maybe if you don't live in a major city where crime is a big issue. I'd rather the cops be out there on patrols. If you're gonna get killed by some gangbanger with a Tec 9, I would bet that his gun isn't registered. Over half of all gun crimes are from unregistered weapons, so this is only going to punish the law-abiding citizens. You can't have only gun owners submit to spot checks, it doesn't make sense given the number of unregistered gun crimes, it's going to have to be everyone or no one. I side with spot checks for no one. And again, I ask, what exactly are they going to be checking for?
-
Other thoughts as to why this is a terrible idea:
You say it's a good use of police time? Maybe if you don't live in a major city where crime is a big issue. I'd rather the cops be out there on patrols. If you're gonna get killed by some gangbanger with a Tec 9, I would bet that his gun isn't registered. Over half of all gun crimes are from unregistered weapons, so this is only going to punish the law-abiding citizens. You can't have only gun owners submit to spot checks, it doesn't make sense given the number of unregistered gun crimes, it's going to have to be everyone or no one. I side with spot checks for no one. And again, I ask, what exactly are they going to be checking for?
Other thoughts as to why this is a terrible idea:
You say it's a good use of police time? Maybe if you don't live in a major city where crime is a big issue. I'd rather the cops be out there on patrols. If you're gonna get killed by some gangbanger with a Tec 9, I would bet that his gun isn't registered. Over half of all gun crimes are from unregistered weapons, so this is only going to punish the law-abiding citizens. You can't have only gun owners submit to spot checks, it doesn't make sense given the number of unregistered gun crimes, it's going to have to be everyone or no one. I side with spot checks for no one. And again, I ask, what exactly are they going to be checking for?
Police? It's a clear cut position for a city inspector, just like the building inspector, or fire inspector. There's already a precedent for home inspections for everything from structural integrity to child welfare. It's not impeding on anyone's rights.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
@the-cysko-kid said:
When was the last time a gang member with an illegal tec-9 opened fire on a bunch of random people at a mall or movie theater or school?
I am dismissive of this arguement because it deserves to be dismissed as irrelevant to the current cause of outrage. If there weren't massacres happening all the time we wouldn't even be talking about this.
A gang member shooting another gang member belongs in with cal's arguement about sword deaths. Does it happen? Sure all the time, but you won't solve murder.
What you're trying to solve is the trend of massacre/suicides which are almost always committed with legally registered firearms.
So someone shows up at your house at 2 PM on a Monday for a random check. You say, just a minute please, I have to get dressed. Run and lock up your gun and answer the door. Or, look out the peephole and see some dude standing there. Who is it? 'inspector Cycso, Cleveland Gun Enforcement Bureau". Can I see your ID card? Show's it. Okay, just a minute please, runs and locks up gun. And answers door. Agent Cysco says "what took you so long to answer your door? You, "none of your fucking business". See what I mean? This is an unworkable plan. Not to mention that you would have to hire people to do it. Most cities are already strapped for cash as it is. And it is in my opinion, a violation of your rights of privacy in your home. A car is traveling throughout the city, on streets. A home is not.
-
Other thoughts as to why this is a terrible idea:
You say it's a good use of police time? Maybe if you don't live in a major city where crime is a big issue. I'd rather the cops be out there on patrols. If you're gonna get killed by some gangbanger with a Tec 9, I would bet that his gun isn't registered. Over half of all gun crimes are from unregistered weapons, so this is only going to punish the law-abiding citizens. You can't have only gun owners submit to spot checks, it doesn't make sense given the number of unregistered gun crimes, it's going to have to be everyone or no one. I side with spot checks for no one. And again, I ask, what exactly are they going to be checking for?
Police? It's a clear cut position for a city inspector, just like the building inspector, or fire inspector. There's already a precedent for home inspections for everything from structural integrity to child welfare. It's not impeding on anyone's rights.
Police? It's a clear cut position for a city inspector, just like the building inspector, or fire inspector. There's already a precedent for home inspections for everything from structural integrity to child welfare. It's not impeding on anyone's rights.
Are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment?
Diehard is spot on when he's saying there's a difference between being out on a public street in a car and being in the privacy of your own home. What you want to implement would put the NRA and the ALCU on the same side, which means it's not even plausible to enact something like this.
-
@the-cysko-kid said:
When was the last time a gang member with an illegal tec-9 opened fire on a bunch of random people at a mall or movie theater or school?
I am dismissive of this arguement because it deserves to be dismissed as irrelevant to the current cause of outrage. If there weren't massacres happening all the time we wouldn't even be talking about this.
A gang member shooting another gang member belongs in with cal's arguement about sword deaths. Does it happen? Sure all the time, but you won't solve murder.
What you're trying to solve is the trend of massacre/suicides which are almost always committed with legally registered firearms.
So someone shows up at your house at 2 PM on a Monday for a random check. You say, just a minute please, I have to get dressed. Run and lock up your gun and answer the door. Or, look out the peephole and see some dude standing there. Who is it? 'inspector Cycso, Cleveland Gun Enforcement Bureau". Can I see your ID card? Show's it. Okay, just a minute please, runs and locks up gun. And answers door. Agent Cysco says "what took you so long to answer your door? You, "none of your fucking business". See what I mean? This is an unworkable plan. Not to mention that you would have to hire people to do it. Most cities are already strapped for cash as it is. And it is in my opinion, a violation of your rights of privacy in your home. A car is traveling throughout the city, on streets. A home is not.
So someone shows up at your house at 2 PM on a Monday for a random check. You say, just a minute please, I have to get dressed. Run and lock up your gun and answer the door. Or, look out the peephole and see some dude standing there. Who is it? 'inspector Cycso, Cleveland Gun Enforcement Bureau". Can I see your ID card? Show's it. Okay, just a minute please, runs and locks up gun. And answers door. Agent Cysco says "what took you so long to answer your door? You, "none of your fucking business". See what I mean? This is an unworkable plan. Not to mention that you would have to hire people to do it. Most cities are already strapped for cash as it is. And it is in my opinion, a violation of your rights of privacy in your home. A car is traveling throughout the city, on streets. A home is not.
So...who's going to pay for mental health reform? That's your guys' position isn't it? You're missing the point anyway. No inspector shows up unscheduled. It's only making sure there IS a safe storage facility and not being kept in the closet. Too many people don't even own a gun safe.
So what your saying is you have rights but no responsibilities?
-
Police? It's a clear cut position for a city inspector, just like the building inspector, or fire inspector. There's already a precedent for home inspections for everything from structural integrity to child welfare. It's not impeding on anyone's rights.
Are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment?
Diehard is spot on when he's saying there's a difference between being out on a public street in a car and being in the privacy of your own home. What you want to implement would put the NRA and the ALCU on the same side, which means it's not even plausible to enact something like this.
Are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment?
Diehard is spot on when he's saying there's a difference between being out on a public street in a car and being in the privacy of your own home. What you want to implement would put the NRA and the ALCU on the same side, which means it's not even plausible to enact something like this.
how is the city building inspector violating your Fourth Amendment rights? it's literally the exact same thing.
-
Are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment?
Diehard is spot on when he's saying there's a difference between being out on a public street in a car and being in the privacy of your own home. What you want to implement would put the NRA and the ALCU on the same side, which means it's not even plausible to enact something like this.
how is the city building inspector violating your Fourth Amendment rights? it's literally the exact same thing.
how is the city building inspector violating your Fourth Amendment rights? it's literally the exact same thing.
How so? Again, you've never defined exactly what they're looking for and what procedures are to be taken if violations are found (all the while ignoring homes which may have unregistered guns, which by the way, account for over half of all gun crimes).
-
There's no difference between an inspector checking your home for structural integrity, an inspector checking your home for fire compliance, and an inspector checking your home for firearms compliance.
There's no difference between an inspector checking your home for structural integrity, an inspector checking your home for fire compliance, and an inspector checking your home for firearms compliance.
I am sorry, there is.
Let's have drug inspection spot checks. Drugs kill people.
Checks can't be made as you suggest. A process has to be followed. First a complaint has to be made with the city, then notifying the property owner they need to make changes to noticeable problems. The fire marshall can't just drive down the street and decide to inspect a private residence with no obvious problems.
You guys are out of your fucking minds. You don't own guns, cool. You'd actually be good with a few cops showing up at you door and let them start rooting around in your drawers?
Unbelievable....and I mean that literally, you wouldn't allow that.
Please tell me I am missing something from a previous post or thread and not commenting on the true intent of the post.
-
There's no difference between an inspector checking your home for structural integrity, an inspector checking your home for fire compliance, and an inspector checking your home for firearms compliance.
I am sorry, there is.
Let's have drug inspection spot checks. Drugs kill people.
Checks can't be made as you suggest. A process has to be followed. First a complaint has to be made with the city, then notifying the property owner they need to make changes to noticeable problems. The fire marshall can't just drive down the street and decide to inspect a private residence with no obvious problems.
You guys are out of your fucking minds. You don't own guns, cool. You'd actually be good with a few cops showing up at you door and let them start rooting around in your drawers?
Unbelievable....and I mean that literally, you wouldn't allow that.
Please tell me I am missing something from a previous post or thread and not commenting on the true intent of the post.
I am sorry, there is.
Let's have drug inspection spot checks. Drugs kill people.
Checks can't be made as you suggest. A process has to be followed. First a complaint has to be made with the city, then notifying the property owner they need to make changes to noticeable problems. The fire marshall can't just drive down the street and decide to inspect a private residence with no obvious problems.
You guys are out of your fucking minds. You don't own guns, cool. You'd actually be good with a few cops showing up at you door and let them start rooting around in your drawers?
Unbelievable....and I mean that literally, you wouldn't allow that.
steve is the one mentioning random checks I have already mentioned that no inspector shows up unscheduled so I will just give you a pass for not having read that far into the argument
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
you guys obviously have paranoid fantasies about the police breaking into your house in search in your underwear drawer when in fact inspectors only look for what is within the letter of the law.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
This idea doesn't even pass a simple cost/benefit analysis, so why don't we just stop talking about it?
-
This idea doesn't even pass a simple cost/benefit analysis, so why don't we just stop talking about it?
This idea doesn't even pass a simple cost/benefit analysis, so why don't we just stop talking about it?
yes let's talk about reforming mental health again who's going to pay for that exactly? please remind me, and don't say Republicans because we know that is not true.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login