The new step in gun control, access by law enforcement

Senator Murphy is advancing his idea of "common sense" gun control using the Oxford shooting as the spear point. He says he is NOT taking away guns, he just wants to make sure that all guns are locked away safely. I'm sure that criminals will obey that law... However, what would such enforcement entail? To make sure that we all have our guns locked away safely law enforcement would have to have 24 hour access to our homes and property to see if they truly are locked up. No warrant or warning necessary. I use Connecticutt as a prime example. When I was stationed there I looked into the possibility of buying a full automatic 1927 Thompson. First there is the fee, the background check, the tax, and finally the security. If I had a legally owned weapon then I had to tell them EXACTLY where it was kept and at any time, for any reason, LE could knock at my door to verify. I even asked what happens if I have the weapon out and disassembled for cleaning. I was told that it better be locked away when they showed up...or else. Imagine all weapons being under that restriction.

I even asked what happens if I have the weapon out and disassembled for cleaning. I was told that it better be locked away when they showed up...or else. Imagine all weapons being under that restriction. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

I have a hard time believing you asked that, and they replied in such a manner. But I'll take you at your word. That was so stupid of them if they said that. But I know I could ask a semantic question like that. All here know what a smart-ass I am.

In my opinion, the law is retroactive. Not so much proactive. If evidence shows the gun was not secured as the law prescribed, that would be criminal.

I love the passion, but nobody is knocking on your door for no good reason to check if any and all weapons are secure. It's your love of guns that's clouding your thinking.

I have a hard time believing you asked that, and they replied in such a manner. But I'll take you at your word. g. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

I won't.

Barelycorn fancies himself as a fiction writer and he is just not a very believable one

The goal of the libs is to take the guns period.

Door to door backed by u n "peacekeepers".

At the end of each street the firearms will be de-milled and destroyed on the spot!

This is reality.

The goal of the libs is to take the guns period.

Door to door backed by u n "peacekeepers".

At the end of each street the firearms will be de-milled and destroyed on the spot!

This is reality. Originally Posted by winn dixie

Yet you support the prosecution of the Michigan couple?

Yet you support the prosecution of the Michigan couple? Originally Posted by WTF

No where have I commented on that subject!

The goal of the libs is to take the guns period. Originally Posted by winn dixie

There are some "sanctuary" locations in which having "guns" is ok.

General descriptions:

#1: Chicago as long as one shoots young people who are Black.
#2: Security guards protecting lawmakers who passed those laws.
#3: When attending BLM gatherings, formal or impromptu.
#4: Courthouse for the purpose of persuading jurors to vote "properly"!

I won't.

Barelycorn fancies himself as a fiction writer and he is just not a very believable one Originally Posted by WTF

I just thought that that was part of his fiction. The premise is true. Buying the gun. But the story about the question and response was too much. I thought it served his purpose to enhance the narrative. (I hate using the term narrative. It fits the story here though.)

The goal of the libs is to take the guns period.

Door to door backed by u n "peacekeepers".

At the end of each street the firearms will be de-milled and destroyed on the spot!

This is reality. Originally Posted by winn dixie

Now this is some fuckin' funny fiction.

By the way, as a serious side note - I'd like to recommend a film about a writer. I just started it.

I fuckin' love beautiful and sharp women.

Yes It would be racist to disarm the gang bangers in chicago.

Yet you support the prosecution of the Michigan couple? Originally Posted by WTF

No where have I commented on that subject! Originally Posted by winn dixie

Did you not see the question mark?

It was a simple question.

Do you support the narrative the Prosecutor painted of this couple?

There are some "sanctuary" locations in which having "guns" is ok.

General descriptions:

#1: Chicago as long as one shoots young people who are Black.
#2: Security guards protecting lawmakers who passed those laws.
#3: When attending BLM gatherings, formal or impromptu.
#4: Courthouse for the purpose of persuading jurors to vote "properly"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

... Blimey! ... Might be your BEST post ever!

#### Salty

I thought it was really stupid.

Not a very high standard

I thought it was really stupid. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

You notice LexusLover always posts anti black points.

Not saying he is racist....but daaaaaamn. Someone needs to PM him not to be so obvious.

... How does mentioning BLM or the black-on-black
shootings over Chicago-way make one a racist??

### Salty