Kamala claims right to walk into your home and inspect your gun safe

Geeko Sportivo said:
When a small child or even a MINOR shot itself or someone else in the home, either by accident or on purpose.

The L:aw will now come after the negligent and irresponsible parents when that happens now!

NEXT STUPID QUESTION PLEASE!
Click to expand...
so harris drafts and enforces a law that allows law enforcement to enter the home and check out how you store your weapons if your kid shoots himself, yet the kid shooting himself was already an incident that allowed law enforcement to enter the home and secure it for investigation, so this new law is really just a 'feel good' law that doesn't do anything different than could already be done.

stop being a brainwashed government slave, you idiot.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
what if I told you that it's not the governments job to provide you protection?
Click to expand...

Then why do we have a military? Why do we have police?

If you are in some extremist libertarian camp where you think everyone is John Galt unto themselves then I suspect this conversation won't go very far.

 
Geeko Sportivo said:
She said this at a press conference after the State Law SHE DRAFTED went into effect while she was ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA 17 YEARS AGO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sounds like maybe a good idea.

You wouldn't be allowed to own an unlicensed nuclear reactor because it's dangerous. You have a right to own a gun...that does NOT mean you have no responsibilities which can be verified by the community.

That's kinda the deal, isn't it? You require inspectors to check plumbing and electrical when you build a house for safety reasons. What's so wrong with more oversight on guns? It's not limiting your ability to own as many guns as you like. It's just a requirement that you verifiably keep then stored safely.

SURELY you want to ensure there isn't any theft or other diversion of guns to the street and the blackmarket, right?
 
Kafka said:
Then why do we have a military? Why do we have police?

If you are in some extremist libertarian camp where you think everyone is John Galt unto themselves then I suspect this conversation won't go very far.
Click to expand...
it won't go far because i'll end up proving you wrong and you'll get pissed.

the military is not there to protect you. It's there to protect the nation as a whole.

the police are not there to protect you. they are there to enforce the law and protect society as a whole.

let me know if you'd like court cases proving that police are not there to protect you.
 

SmarterthanYou said:
the military is not there to protect you. It's there to protect the nation as a whole.
Click to expand...

That's easily the most ridiculous parsing of the concept.

SmarterthanYou said:
the police are not there to protect you. they are there to enforce the law and protect society as a whole.
Click to expand...

And it continues.

SmarterthanYou said:
let me know if you'd like court cases proving that police are not there to protect you.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd like to see that.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it won't go far because i'll end up proving you wrong and you'll get pissed.

the military is not there to protect you. It's there to protect the nation as a whole.

the police are not there to protect you. they are there to enforce the law and protect society as a whole.

let me know if you'd like court cases proving that police are not there to protect you.
Click to expand...
Keep talking RETARD!

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

You exposing your ignorance is CLASSIC!
 
Kafka said:
Yeah, sounds like maybe a good idea.

You wouldn't be allowed to own an unlicensed nuclear reactor because it's dangerous. You have a right to own a gun...that does NOT mean you have no responsibilities which can be verified by the community.

That's kinda the deal, isn't it? You require inspectors to check plumbing and electrical when you build a house for safety reasons. What's so wrong with more oversight on guns? It's not limiting your ability to own as many guns as you like. It's just a requirement that you verifiably keep then stored safely.

SURELY you want to ensure there isn't any theft or other diversion of guns to the street and the blackmarket, right?
Click to expand...
For every restriction you want to put on gun is ownership we'll put on abortion. Deal? BTW the right to own a gun actually appears in the Constitution. There is no right to an abortion but I'll play pretend with you for the sake of this discussion
 
this is what we are up against. fricktards left stunned that cops do not have to risk their life for mine

just another daily example of how ignorant on many levels one must be to be a democrat in this day and age
 
Yakuda said:
For every restriction you want to put on gun is ownership we'll put on abortion. Deal?
Click to expand...

Not sure you really want to start down that aisle given that your side is the one that is trying to outlaw all access to any level of abortion services. But I'll play along.

Yakuda said:
There is no right to an abortion but I'll play pretend with you for the sake of this discussion
Click to expand...

Actually the court finding related to Roe was not seeking a "right" to an abortion but actually helped firm up the right to privacy. That is now being eroded. If I were a second amendment person I'd be worried that the elimination of the right to privacy from the overturning of Roe might threaten gun ownership being a private matter.

The 2A doesn't say anything about verification of how the guns are stored and handled. It only covers the right to access the guns.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so harris drafts and enforces a law that allows law enforcement to enter the home and check out how you store your weapons if your kid shoots himself, yet the kid shooting himself was already an incident that allowed law enforcement to enter the home and secure it for investigation, so this new law is really just a 'feel good' law that doesn't do anything different than could already be done.

stop being a brainwashed government slave, you idiot.
Click to expand...
No one brainwashes me. I just happen to favor politicians that think like I do.

If you had a small child, and he went next door and accidentally shot the next door neighbor's kid with your gun, THE POLICE WOULD WANT TO SEARCH YOUR HOUSE AND INVESTIGATE HOW THE CHILD GOT ACCESS TO YOUR GUN!

So don't be stupid!
 
Kafka said:
Not sure you really want to start down that aisle given that your side is the one that is trying to outlaw all access to any level of abortion services. But I'll play along.



Actually the court finding related to Roe was not seeking a "right" to an abortion but actually helped firm up the right to privacy. That is now being eroded. If I were a second amendment person I'd be worried that the elimination of the right to privacy from the overturning of Roe might threaten gun ownership being a private matter.

The 2A doesn't say anything about verification of how the guns are stored and handled. It only covers the right to access the guns.
Click to expand...
Yeah for every restriction you put on gun ownership you out one on abortion.

I don't get to kill people in privacy or public with my guns. Privacy isnt an excuse for killing

So you better have a good reason to invade my home beside "how do you store your guns" unless you're prepared tio have people make sure you use birth control
 
Kafka said:
That's easily the most ridiculous parsing of the concept.


And it continues.


Yeah, I'd like to see that.
Click to expand...

Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

DeShaney v. Winnebago County - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

www.historynewsnetwork.org

The Police Have No Legal "Duty to Protect" Anyone. Should they Get More Money?

The Supreme Court has ruled that police officers have no definitive legal duty to take protective action on behalf of anyone. Would this fact influence debates about funding them if it were more widely known?
www.historynewsnetwork.org www.historynewsnetwork.org
 

Yakuda said:
So you better have a good reason to invade my home beside "how do you store your guns" unless you're prepared tio have people make sure you use birth control
Click to expand...

I think the debate is still open as to whether abortion is "murder", but it is NOT a matter of contention that blowing an elementary school kid's head off is murder.

How about we address the cases that we ALL agree are murder and then worry about the more subtle end of things?
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
No one brainwashes me. I just happen to favor politicians that think like I do.

If you had a small child, and he went next door and accidentally shot the next door neighbor's kid with your gun, THE POLICE WOULD WANT TO SEARCH YOUR HOUSE AND INVESTIGATE HOW THE CHILD GOT ACCESS TO YOUR GUN!

So don't be stupid!
Click to expand...
something that they would have already had the authority to do without this law. stop being stupid
 
Kafka said:
No, I mean what was she saying before this? Was this some campaign promise (remember politicians do tend to overpromise shit).
Click to expand...
this was a public relations interview justifying the strongest anti-gun lawns in the nation - which she was quite proud of to win votes in S.F.

and again - her values have not changed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top