Posted on 10/20/2014 6:15:12 AM PDT by fruser1
A new firearm policy from the United Kingdom Home Office, put in force on October 15, has accelerated the once-proud nation's devolution into a police state. The Home Office's October 2014 "Guide on Firearms Licensing Law" adds a new rule allowing for police to conduct warrantless surprise inspections of a gun owner's firearm storage practices. As bad as that is, what's far worse is that the President of the United States cites England's gun control policies as a model for America to follow.
(Excerpt) Read more at nraila.org ...
E.g., if you get a fishing license, the game wardens and rangers don't need probably cause to check out your stuff in the field.
Probably states on the license, much like a driver’s license: “Keeping of arms constitutes consent to have your premises and person searched at any time deemed reasonable by local constables.”
This is nothing new. During the Wiemar republic, in Germany, during the late 1920’s and early 1930’s, the government ruled that every weapon must be registered. Oh, they promised that all names will be kept in a “LOCKED BOX” and the government will NEVER, NOT EVER, use those names to confiscate the weapons. Then came the HITLER ERA. All weapons were confiscated and those people that didn’t turn their weapons in, willingly, were arrested or shot. Now, it’s the U K’s turn, to do the same thing. Eventually, this will come to the United States. TO KEEP US ALL SAFE, OF COURSE. WHEN ARE THE PEOPLE GOING TO REALIZE THAT THEY CAN NEVER TRUST GOVERNMENT. ANY GOVERNMENT.
In the case of a hunting or fishing license, the idea is to conserve natural resources for everyone and for future generations.
Once they can make universal gun registration the law, this type of warrant less search is the next logical progression. Criminals can’t leagally buy guns, so they’ll steal yours. So you have to keep yours locked in a “safe place”. So of course, the law will have to check up on you to make sure you’re in compliance. For a lot of people, it won’t be worth the hassle.
Are licenses automatic? Or can they be delayed and denied?
How does that match with "shall not be infringed"?
The Brits have a history if the government attempting to take away it’s subject’s guns.
The US has a history of it’s citizens refusing to allow it’s government to take away their guns.
See mid 1770s to early 1780s for reference on how well thats worked out in the past.
With this past year’s events in CT, we’ve seen that even the gun owning residents of deep blue states will tell their own government to shove it on gun control. If the governments (local, state, fed) here in the US were to take the next step and launch confiscations, it would have regrettable, but all too predictable, results.
Several states tried that last year. Let’s look at the results:
CO had successful recall elections that booted/made examples of pro gun control politicians.
CT had an 85% non-compliance rate
NY slapped the “Law Enforcement Sensitive” classification onto it’s numbers so the public couldn’t see whether it’s gun owning citizens were following CT’s lead.
CT sent out confiscation letters to a very small subset of it’s gun owning citizens (those amongst the 15% who had started the registration process, but failed to complete it by the deadline), and almost had a flood of pro-2nd Amendment groups rush to the state, which spurred the cops to get the politicians to back down.
The easiest way to win an argument with a Lib on this issue is to cite the above, tell them that the cops aren’t going to be dumb enough to enforce mass confiscation orders, and ask them if THEY are willing to go door to door demanding the firearms of their neighbors/fellow citizens.
“the President of the United States cites England’s gun control policies as a model for America to follow.”
In his dreams maybe.
Unfortunately, the gov is getting savvy to that.
They would not likely do an outright, door to door confiscation.
However, they might do a registration on purchase and annual licensing and/or taxation scheme that gets more and more expensive. Meaning, the gov is happy to bide it’s time.
It’s nice to think that folks would revolt over such a thing but they probably won’t. Google “Whiskey rebellion” and contrast that to tobacco taxation today.
Many comfortable sheep in the country today.
If only western governments were as hard on encroaching Islam as they are of their own liberty minded citizens.
“Many comfortable sheep in the country today.”
Well armed sheep, however.
Que up “Sheep With Guns”.
;-)
CT tried registration last year. Not even all weapons; just “assault” ones.
85% of the estimated owners of such weapons ignored the law. Iirc they figure it was something like 100,000 citizens with 300,00 guns.
IOW massive civil disobedience that made those 100,000 subject to prosecution on Class D felony charges.
NY State, with a similar law, has refused (afaik) to release it’s compliance data. We can assume from that it’s not in the gun grabbers’ favor and given the much larger population of NY vs CT is a much larger overall number ( in the low millions even).
I think it was “Cows With Guns”
;-)
Oh you want to check my “storage”? Sure, but it’s pretty empty since that boating accident.
That may be true today, but there will come a time when an administration in the future will use their own ARMY, like the Nazis did in Germany. Any time you or anyone give the government an INCH, they will find a way to take a MILE. Look at what’s happening in the IRS, or the EPA. It’s time for the people in this country to take their country back from this intrusive, bloated, despotic government.
“Unfortunately, the gov is getting savvy to that.”
Never more savvy than the “People”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.