Posted on 11/10/2013 3:43:44 PM PST by grumpygresh
They ‘offered’ us a free inspection of our houses to access and ‘advise’ us as to fire safety/hazards in our homes.
When they rang my doorbell, I said, with a smile: “No, thank you.”
they were actually stunned. ‘But, but...it's a free service. Why wouldn't you want...”
I interrupted. “No, Thank you.”
“But why”, they asked, “do you say no?”
“Because I still can.”
“What?”
“Because this ‘free’ inspection is voluntary, the first time around. And I can still say “NO”. Now, if you have a brochure outlining what safety precautions should be looked for and implemented, I'd be glad to have one. I'm not so ignorant that I couldn't read and understand.
I'm also not so stupid that I don't know that this ‘free’ intrusion - ah ‘service’ isn't a test run to see how compliant people will be - for planning future COMPULSORY inspections. Y'all have a good day now.”
shuts door.
this was over 50 years ago. They've been working on take over/take down for a long time.
I think you have to apply with the local police chief before buying. Somebody could correct me though :)
You need a firearms ID card in Mass so perhaps they assume all cardholders have a weapon. Sounds like prima facie evidence of infringement to me.
Didn’t Wash State propose something like this?
HB1588, last year. Part of what killed this house bill was public outrage when the details came out. A Doofus Democrat representative admitted sponsoring the astro-turf bill, written by out of state interests, without reading it.
We got that juicy tidbit when said Doofus had to backtrack over yearly police home inspections for "safe gun storage". HB1588 proceeded to go down in flames
Now, there's a public initiative making the rounds trying to recreate the bill. I give it even odds in this bats**t state.
Oh, and the ostensible main purpose of HB1588 was to close the “gunshow loophole”. 2nd Amendment hatred was a given. Breaking the 4th Amendement was just a little statist freebie.
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/2013/11/graham_selectman_could_use_refresher_on_constitution
"We’re from the government and we’re here to inspect your guns!”
In America, it sounds crazy. Here in Massachusetts, it’s just another day in liberal paradise.
Last week, Swampscott Selectman Barry Greenfield proposed the idea of mandatory home inspections for the town’s 600 licensed gun owners. He mentioned the Newtown massacre. He mentioned children’s safety.
There is no record, however, of Selectman Greenfield mentioning the Constitution.
Massachusetts law requires gun owners to store their firearms safely. Greenfield is frustrated with the inability of local cops to push their way into local homes and have a look around without all that “probable cause” and “search warrant” nonsense.
“We need the ability to enforce the state law,” the selectman said, adding that he’s discussed the matter with Swampscott Police Chief Ron Madigan.
If this incredibly bad goose-stepping attack on gun ownership sounds familiar, it should. The state of Washington considered it earlier this year. Then some lawyer heard a rumor about some “Second Amendment thingy” and it went away.
By the way, nobody should be surprised that this attempt to intimidate gun owners is happening in Swampscott, aka “Marblehead Without The Beemers.” It’s a town notorious for treating citizens like servants to be ordered around. Remember the school ordering every parent to attend a program on drug abuse and threatening to punish their kids if they didn’t show up?
Liberals who think “hatin’ on guns” is a guaranteed winner may want to check in with Westford Selectman Robert Jeffries. He proposed requiring gun owners to store them at their gun clubs. He’s now former selectman Jeffries.
But the real question for Massachusetts liberals is this: Why do Swampscotters (Swampscottians?) put up with such heavy-handed treatment from their public “servants?” Are they, as citizens, prepared to put up with government-mandated inspections of their bedrooms and closets?
This isn’t a Second Amendment issue. It’s a Fourth Amendment one — unreasonable search and seizure. If Swampscott residents who don’t own guns sit back and allow this to happen, they’ll be playing their role in the famous parable of Martin Niemoller:
“First they came for the gun owners, but I didn’t own a gun … ”
- See more at: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/2013/11/graham_selectman_could_use_refresher_on_constitution#sthash.p8nPcKVN.dpuf
In MA you even need a license for pepper spray.
I kid you not.
.
Or in Massachusetts do you have to register with some agency if you own a gun?
Criminal History Systems Board (CHSB)
Permit holders and transfers of firearms are registered there.
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.