Ever wonder how liberals would implement a gun-free America? After incidents like the mass murder at Virginia Tech, arguments for total gun control appear faster than anyone can say Ismail Ax, but they never quite explain how to get from point A to point Z. Fortunately for us, Toledo Blade columnist Dan Simpson takes us step by step through the process. The retired diplomat assures us that he's no "crazed liberal zealot" as he skips merrily down the path to a police state (via QandO).
It starts off quietly enough:
Now, how would one disarm the American population? First of all, federal or state laws would need to make it a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine and one year in prison per weapon to possess a firearm. The population would then be given three months to turn in their guns, without penalty.
One might think to start with a Constitutional amendment first. Simpson appears to have forgotten that pesky little 2nd Amendment -- you know, the one that the Founding Fathers thought so unimportant as to put it before unreasonable search and seizure.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. The former hunter explains that he doesn't want to shut down that pastime:
Hunters would be able to deposit their hunting weapons in a centrally located arsenal, heavily guarded, from which they would be able to withdraw them each hunting season upon presentation of a valid hunting license. The weapons would be required to be redeposited at the end of the season on pain of arrest. When hunters submit a request for their weapons, federal, state, and local checks would be made to establish that they had not been convicted of a violent crime since the last time they withdrew their weapons. In the process, arsenal staff would take at least a quick look at each hunter to try to affirm that he was not obviously unhinged.
Aha, the tried and true "quick look"! So what would that "quick look" entail -- checking for drool? A T-shirt that says, "The voices in my head don't like you"? In the meantime, all of these "hunters" would have their firearms for weeks on end while the rest of us would be forcibly disarmed. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold probably would have qualified for a hunting license, and Cho managed to get past a records check, too. Would a "quick look" have stopped either of them -- and would it provide a due process for the innocent that would get denied access to their hunting weapons?
But wait -- remember that whole bit about unreasonable search and seizure? Well, if Simpson can ignore the 2nd Amendment, then why should he worry about the rest of the Constitution?
The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building. All firearms would be seized. The owners of weapons found in the searches would be prosecuted: $1,000 and one year in prison for each firearm. ...
On the streets it would be a question of stop-and-search of anyone, even grandma with her walker, with the same penalties for "carrying."
Got that? No search warrants, no probable cause, not even the suspicion of a "quick look" would be required. "Special squads" of police would simply blockade you, storm into your house without permission, and rip it to pieces looking for your weapons.
But he's not a "crazed liberal zealot". Oh, no, no, no. He just thinks that the government should have the right and the duty to ignore the Constitution and to invade your homes. Oddly, Simpson doesn't see the irony in that the 2nd Amendment intended to keep government from acting in exactly the manner he describes and endorses. The 2nd Amendment was meant to stop people like Don Simpson.
Oh, by the way: this defender of America is a member of the editorial boards for both the Toledo Blade and the Pittsburgh Gazette.
Note: I'm really, really hoping this turned out to be satire, but I somehow doubt it.