Washington Gun Ban Legislation Includes Home Gun Inspections

February 20th, 2013
Updated 04/08/2013 at 8:48 pm

The state of Washington has been making headlines by pushing what’s known as Senate Bill 5737, a bill that is not only calling for an assault weapons ban but actually includes annual home inspections for gun owners.

Prompted by mainstream media outcry over the mass shootings, a threat which the Department of Justice recently revealed in a groundbreaking memo is actually extremely minor with only 35 individuals killed each year in mass shooting scenarios, Washington state lawmakers are under fire from lawyers, activists, and everyday concerned citizens over the new extreme gun control bill. A move that the very same DOJ memo states is actually fruitless.

home gun inspectionsIn the memo itself, the Department of Justice plainly states a number of reasons as to why an assault weapons ban is not effective in reducing crime (and can increase it). The memo states:

“Gun buybacks are ineffective as generally implemented. 1. The buybacks are too small to have an impact. 2. The guns turned in are at low risk of ever being used in a crime.”

A reality that sheds a lot of light on the situation when considering that it is always law-abiding individuals who end up following gun ban laws, not criminals. As a result of this, and as the DOJ memo explains, the guns turned in are legal guns — not criminally obtained weapons that flourish among a gun ban. We know from ATF data, for example, that around 26% of firearms used in criminal activity are stolen, and another 47% are purchased through straw purchases. Criminals will always obtain guns without concern through illegal means because they do not adhere to the latest legislation, and instead favor gun bans as they know the public will be disarmed.

Home Police Searches for Gun Owners

Now here’s where the Washington bill sticks out from the rest, pushing the maximum when it comes to gun bans and extreme procedures to ensure that every gun is accounted for. Washington citizens under the bill are allowed to keep firearms purchased before the bill, however they must submit to police-run full home inspections on a yearly basis.

The bill states:

“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.”

The writing shows how politicians continue to push the envelope with their legislation, seeing what they can get away with next. As Seattle lawyer Lance Palmer, who identifies himself as a liberal who was once very anti-gun, told The Seattle Times,

“They always say, we’ll never go house to house to take your guns away. But then you see this, and you have to wonder… I understand why my right-wing opponents worry about having to fight a government takeover.”

The fact of the matter is that more and more individuals are realizing the statistics and facts behind the gun control issue, and the polarity issues between left vs. right are starting to diminish. People are realizing how more guns mean less crime, and are becoming seriously outraged at intrusive government legislation like we see now in Washington sate.

Additional Sources:


Washington State Legislature

Share Button

Tags: , , , , ,

Category: Second Amendment

About the Author ()

Google Plus Profile Anthony Gucciardi is the creator of Storyleak, accomplished writer, producer, and seeker of truth. His articles have been read by millions worldwide and are routinely featured on major alternative news websites like the infamous Drudge Report, Infowars, NaturalNews, G Edward Griffin's Reality Zone, and many others. He is also a founding member of the third largest alternative health site in the world, NaturalSociety.com.

Comments (1)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Tionico says:

    Adam Kline, a socialist big government nannyiser from Seattle, has simply re-filed his worn out AWB from the past.. almost word for word. He tried in in ;10, and before that in '06, I think it was. Same provisions. HE was ehad of the Senate Judiciary Committee in '10, which, of course, called the bill for a hearing. I watched him lie outright, along with the Ralph They should have both been censured for outright lying before a government hearing. Neither of them care about our rights (Washington's Constitutioin is FAR more specific than our US one.. declaring the right to arms specifically as an individual right, and specifically for the purpose of personal defense, among others. WHY they are picking on the "assault weapon" I cannot fathom. Kline, last go-round, was brought to a rifle range by a co-commitee member Senator, where he fired a semiautomatic Ruger 10/2.., stock (wooden stocks, no add ons). Then, the range officer took a screwdriver, removed ONE SCREW, and swapped the stock for some sort of "black and ugly" wiht "things sticking out of it". He watched.. then icked up the same rifle and fired it again, agrreeing it was, in essence, the same tool. Yet, in the hearing, he declared the second "version" to be amongst the number of "assault weapons" that must be taken off our streets, as they are "too dangerous". Fascitelli declared that "assaule weapons" should be banned as "they are easily converted to full automatic in just a few minutes with common tools"… sort of true.. but neglects to mention the signficant fact that the part that is changed is precisely the part WE cannot get.. the receiver. WITH that part, yes.. but try and get one.. hardly anyone can. So, he lied. And Kline ate up every word he said.

    What was hilarous, Fascitalli, on leavcing the hearing room and walking down the hall of the building, noticed that many of the several hundred people gethered to witness the hearing were armed.. openly. He nearly had a heart attack, and ran up to a nearby State Patrol Officer… demaniding he DO SOMEHTING, THJEY"VE GOT GUNNNNSSSSSSSS. Mr. WSP calmly declared "it's legal, they're doing nothing I can say anything about". Perfect…….. I uderstand he is an export from some back east úber liberal state, maybe New Jersey or Massachussetts, come out here to collect his paycheck for lobbying against our way of life. Creep!! Ban him back to Boston, or wherever he came from. They need him there. He probably doesn't realise he is a lot safer out here than he'd be back home.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *