• hatedbad@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    jfc what an absolute hellhole of a police state you’ve dreamt up. so many of your hairbrained ideas amount to “cops should have unlimited access to your private life”. how exactly do you think this would play out given the US and it’s systemic racism and classism?

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      8 months ago

      If your entire private life is guns then maybe the police should have unlimited access to it.

      Most black and poor people aren’t ammosexuals believe it or not!

      • FireTower@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think his point was that this sentence “Require secure and separate storage of the gun and ammunition verified randomly at least once a year” would imply that police could enter anyone’s home at any time during a year without consent or prior notice. Which is a big 4th amendment violation here in the US.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          8 months ago

          Buying a firearm should be considered consent to measures of accountability.

          Your rights as a firearm owner are worth less than your responsibility to society as a firearm owner.

          Not to mention “unreasonable search and seizure” is pretty well ruled out by it being a law establishing it as common procedure.

          It’d be like ruling the very concept of mandatory vehicle inspections or probation to be unconstitutional.

          • FireTower@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Not to mention “unreasonable search and seizure” is pretty well ruled out by it being a law establishing it as common procedure.

            I don’t mean to be rude or blunt. But bills passed by Congress do not supercede the constitution or act as a qualifier of constitutionality. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

            If Congress decided you can’t speak your mind well tough cookies the Constitution says 1st Amendment. A law establishing something as common procedure doesn’t make that procedure virtuous or constitutional.

            • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              No but there’s a wide gulf between proving unreasonable search and seizure vs proving restriction of free expression.

              My point is that laws establishing warrantable causes for search rarely fall afoul of unreasonable search and seizure, mainly because they involve the reasonable procedure of warrants and having to prove cause without.