Kudos to the lawyer, I doubt we'd see eye to eye on much, for bringing an issue of civil rights to the Times attention. And Kudos to the Times for bothering to report it. I haven't hid my disdain for the quality of reporting of most media establishments today, more often they fail to do their homework or fail to even report on real issues, but today the Times has done it's job. Now on to the law itself.
What has gotten everyone, even liberal pro-gun control advocates, a little nervous is a little clause in the bill that would give county sheriffs the ability to enter into the house of someone who owns an assault weapon and inspect the premises to make sure that the weapon was locked up. All without a warrant of course, or any notification whatsoever. Like I said, you really have to screw up to get a reporter, who is pro-gun control, to call a piece of legislation Orwellian.
It also turns out that some of the law makers who sponsored the bill are now expressing concern.
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.You think? Your job as a law maker is to pas laws, which also assumes that you actually read the damn thing, especially when its only 8 pages! How hard would it have been to take the time out of your day to read the bill? This should not only dissuade statist of the notion that you just need to get the right men in charge, because what does it matter how smart, skilled, or principled the person is if they don't read the bill?! Tyranny is coming to America, not because our law makers are necessarily corrupt or evil, though the jury is still out in my opinion, but because they are lazy.
If a lawmaker, or future lawmaker, ever reads this blog, please, I beg of you, follow this one simple maxim. Vote against a law as a matter of principal until you have read it, and are fully aware of the consequences of said law. How many times has a law maker come out and expressed regret for passing a law that had terrible unforeseen consequences, because they failed to vet the bill? The Patriot Act anyone?
The Washington State Assault weapon's bill is now D.O.A, especially after this article, because even the sponsor has admitted that such a provision is against the constitution. Right now they are blaming some unnamed staffer for the insertion of such a clause; color me unconvinced. If it were me, and some staffer inserted this into the bill, I would publicly out and fire them. Not only would it be a shrewd political move but someone who inserts stuff like this into law, and there is no argument whatsoever that this provision is somehow permissible under the constitution, has no business being in a position were they can influence policy.
A person once said that totalitarianism would once be clothed in the flag and carrying a cross. I think it is far more likely to end up due to the sloth of our legislators and ignorance of our populace. The velvet glove is something I fear far more than the iron fist.