Washington State Dem Bill Would Allow Warrantless Searches of Private Homes for Guns

The bill's backers claim it was a "mistake." Their mistake was writing out their intentions in plain English.

Responding to the Newtown school massacre, the bill would ban the sale of semi-automatic weapons that use detachable ammunition magazines. Clips that contain more than 10 rounds would be illegal.

But then, with respect to the thousands of weapons like that already owned by Washington residents, the bill says this:

“In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing shall ... safely and securely store the assault weapon. The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.”

In other words, come into homes without a warrant to poke around. Failure to comply could get you up to a year in jail.

Democrats are distancing themselves as fast at they can from this bill, which has been revised. But the fact is, anyone who believes in any sort of mandate for gun safes, gun locks and so forth is advocating either for a law that they know cannot be enforced, or for mandatory warrantless inspections of the homes of law-abiding Americans to ensure compliance.

The bill's backers have absolutely no excuse for their so-called mistake.

I spoke to two of the sponsors. One, Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, a lawyer who typically is hyper-attuned to civil-liberties issues, said he did not know the bill authorized police searches because he had not read it closely before signing on.

“I made a mistake,” Kline said. “I frankly should have vetted this more closely.”

That lawmakers sponsor bills they haven’t read is common. Still, it’s disappointing on one of this political magnitude. Not counting a long table, it’s only an eight-page bill.

This wasn't a mistake. These leftists are absolutely playing with fire. In their heart of hearts they're with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who said in 1995 that total gun confiscation was her goal.

It still is.

The reporter on this story, Danny Westneat, deserves some credit for reporting it, but he should show more skepticism. How does a "mistake" get written into a bill in coherent language? Who did it? When? The only answer he gets is "unnamed staff." Has anyone been fired?

Westneat closes:

Murray had alluded at a gun-control rally in January that progress on guns could take years.

“We will only win if we reach out and continue to change the hearts and minds of Washingtonians,” Murray said. “We can attack them, or start a dialogue.”

Good plan, very bad start. What’s worse, the case for the perfectly reasonable gun-control bills in Olympia just got tougher.

Why is pushing gun control a "good plan" at all? Why is more gun control legislation automatically "reasonable" when it clearly wasn't reasonable at all? How's it working out for Chicago?

Second Amendment advocates should not give one inch to the left on this. Not one inch. No magazine limits, nothing. The left's agenda has been exposed. They'll take an inch today, a foot tomorrow, and total overturn of the Second Amendment as soon as they think they can get away with it.

h/t NRO