Posted on 05/20/2009 8:07:30 PM PDT by marktwain
SIOUX CITY, Iowa (KTIV) - Sioux City city councilman Aaron Rochester is speaking out about national gun control legislation.
He says talks of allowing authorities to search homes for unregistered guns goes against the right to bear arms, and he wants to make sure Sioux City police know it.
Aaron Rochester, City Council Member:"I think it's going against constitutional rights, and I think our police department in Sioux City should really know every bit of the second amendment so that they can interpret it and do things according to what our founding fathers meant."
Rochester's given council direction to make sure all new police officers have a thorough review of the second amendment.
He also suggested making them memorize it, like they do with the fourth amendment, or the right to search and seizure.
“...talks of allowing authorities to search homes for unregistered guns ...”
Who is stupid enough to even utter the words?
That caught my attention as well.
When the police start acting this way, the best bet is to call for a review of police weaponry and equipment, for civilians to determine if the police actually *need* those weapons, or are just stockpiling an arsenal of excessive and dangerous weaponry.
This will get the police to shut up in a hurry. The reason being that because of all the RICO property confiscations, local police were often given a big chunk of money “off budget”, by the feds, which they had no legitimate use for, so they often bought all sorts of exotic weaponry that no local police force needs.
Things like heavy machine guns, hand grenades, high explosives, even armored vehicles are fairly common, even in small cities.
The police can always think up some amazing theoretical need for such things. One I remember, was a police chief who said he needed a .50 caliber “Ma Deuce” M2 machine gun, in case somebody hijacked a commercial airliner with which they planned to attack his Podunk town. He said he “needed” an anti-aircraft weapon.
Yet these same police officers will sometimes suggest that they “need” to disarm the public.
So when the police chime in with this stupid idea, turn it around on them. I will give you odds that they will shut up in a hurry, not wanting to lose their military weaponry. Because you never know when Norway or Canada might launch a sneak attack.
They might FIND some unregistered weapons, but not really the way they intended to.
Let's see, you want a list? How about Obama and his entire Administration, most of the Democrats in Congress, many Democrat Governors and State Legislators, as well as quite a few municipal Dem politicians, including mayors and police chiefs.
Bump
This is humor, right?
Do I actually need to point out to you, the obvious holes in your scheme?
Leo’s read and heed. http://www.rightsidenews.com/200905064676/homeland-security/your-local-sheriff-the-10th-amendment-and-the-orders-we-will-not-obey.html
I wonder if some of those are ending up in the hands of the drug cartels.
ANY serious mention of warrantless searches against American citizens in their homes by ANY public official ought to be grounds for immediate impeachment and removal from office.
Slightly off-topic, I didn’t realize that the Fourth Amendment protected “the right to search and seizure.”
Idiot “journalist.” (I hope.)
Right. Got it.
Now, here's the deal. We are living in a different USA than the one we used to live in. I read a lot of posts here, indicating that many folks haven't gotten that yet.
Certainly, we should, and we will, fight this Totalitarianism as best we can. However. Exactly whom do you think is going to impeach Obama? The Democrat Congress? I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen. You can work your way down the Democrat power structure from there, and you will get the same result. Anywhere the Democrats are in power, they aren't going to remove themselves. The only people who can stop this are the voters in the next election. But now that ACORN has the Vote Fraud Machine well-oiled with taxpayer dollars, it's going to be tough to defeat these clowns.
"Who's talking about warrantless searches? Can you give some references?"
I didn't say anything about warrantless searches. Maybe that was someone else's post. In that vein, however; the Democrats don't care what's constitutional. If the UN, or some third world country has a law that allows for gun confiscation, that's good enough for them.
I think people are too busy making fun of the Democrats' comments, and are responding by saying, "They can't do that. That's unconstitutional!"
People need to take this a little more seriously. The Democrats have decided what they are going to do, and they are convinced that they can get away with it. The only question is how they are going to go about it.
That is a list of folks we suspect “think” that way.
NOT a list of those who’ve SAID IT OUT LOUD!
Okay, I’m game. What problem exists with a civilian inventory of a police department’s arsenal?
Okay, here's what you do - go down to your local police department and walk up to the front desk. Tell them, "I'm a citizen, and I'm here to inventory your department's arsenal, to make sure you don't have any weapons that you don't need".
If your local police department doesn't have all the assorted military weaponry, mentioned in the post, to which I originally responded; go find a department that has all that stuff and walk in and declare your intentions.
Get back to us and let us know how it went. We'll wait to hear from you. A very long time.
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.