WI Police Chief Demands Citizens Allow Cops to Roam Through Homes Looking for Guns

Hear that pounding at your door? It is the Beloit, Wisconsin, police chief demanding that you allow him and his jackbooted thug officers to roam through your house looking for guns. Seriously. That is what Chief Norm Jacobs wants citizens of his town to allow.

This has to be one of the most un-American ideas imaginable. To allow government thugs to freely roam through your home looking for something that under the Constitution you are allowed to have in the first place is a bad, bad idea.

But not only is Chief Jacobs a promulgator of anti-American policies, he is also a screeching purveyor of hyperbole. In his address to the city, he said guns were *just like* Ebola.

“Gun violence is as serious as the Ebola virus is being represented in the media, and we should fight it using the tools that we’ve learned from our health providers,” the chief said last week.

Hear that, America? Chief Jacobs thinks your Second Amendment rights is like a virus. If that isn’t a perfect example of the way leftists think there is no better example.

So, is there some sort of gun emergency in Beloit? According to the local newspaper, this year there have been six “gun related” homicides and 10 armed robberies. So, for these incidents, Chief Jacobs wants to suspend the Fourth and Second Amendments of the United States Constitution.

Still, this is a bad idea on more than airy Constitutional issues. Inviting police into your home is a horrible idea in every case. After all, a police officer’s job is to arrest lawbreakers and if they are stumping through your home and they see something they deem to be illegal, you will be arrested. After all, they are duty bound to arrest if they feel you have broken some law or are in possession of something they’ve deemed to be illegal.

By allowing these government thugs into your home you are essentially assuring that you will be arrested for something they don’t like. It is a pretty foolish move on the part of the citizen, really.

Jacobs isn’t the first stormtrooper who had this brilliant idea, though. Democrats in Washington State also tried to institute this sort of policy last year. But in Washington State, the law would have required every citizen in the state to allow police in to make sure that guns are “stored properly” in the home. At least in Beloit, the chief said his policy was voluntary!

Pelosi's Comprehension Problem
Taxpayer Paid Professor Forces Students to Recite Faux 'Pledge of Allegiance' That Mocks USA & Republicans
  • Walter_Cronanty

    Well, he doesn’t demand, he asks that you allow a police officer to search your home for weapons: “As part of the community, to stop the violence effort, the Beloit Police Department is offering the opportunity of a home visit by a Beloit Police Officer to legally inspect your house for weapons you may not even know are there. If you are interested in this program, simply call to request a visit by a Beloit Police Officer.”
    If someone responds affirmatively to this request they are so stupid they should be jailed for their own protection as well as for the protection of the public at large.

  • Michael Lang

    Liberal fascists in training.

  • Retired military

    Okay I am going to say that from what I read that I think that Mr Huston jumped the shark a bit on this. From the article I read this action would be strictly voluntary and at the request of someone responsible for the home. To my knowledge the Police Chief didnt demand anything.

    Your second line of the article states “It is the Beloit, Wisconsin, police chief demanding that you allow him and his jackbooted thug officers to roam through your house looking for guns.”

    Yet your last line in the article states

    “At least in Beloit, the chief said his policy was voluntary!”

    So you contradict yourself in your own article.

    Also

    “Hear that, America? Chief Jacobs thinks your Second Amendment rights is like a virus

    No he compared gun violence to Ebola not 2nd admendment rights. What Mr Huston did here IMO was compare gun violence to 2nd admendment rights with his statement since he replaced the words gun violence with 2nd admendment rights in the police chief’s statement.

    Nowhere did the police chief say anything like
    “A person’s right to own a firearm is akin to Ebola” Nor did he mention a person’s right to own firearms was unlawful, should be changed, should be taken away, or anything close to that.

    All that being said I believe anyone who requests the cops come in and search their home for guns deserves exactly what they get especially when the cops find evidence of something else illegal in a perfectly lawful search. Lawful because the person responsible for the home requested it.

    IMHO only an idiot would call up the cops and say “come search my house”

    Mr Huston if I am wrong or you read something different then please provide a link to it and i will gladly admit that I am wrong in your ascertations..

    • Nothing with government is “voluntary.” If these morons allow this, the next step is to make it a requirement. This sort of stuff MUST ALWAYS be resisted.

      • Retired military

        Where as there are plenty of morons out there (including anyone (with very few exceptions) who says to cops to come search my house please there is nothing “out there” to really stop or even get your tail in a knot about. There isn’t any law being proposed, or regulations or anything. Just a cop that is saying “Hey (morons) if you think you have a gun (or anything else we can find that is illegal) that you want us to search for then just call us.
        What was stopping someone before from calling up the cops and saying come out and search my house? What is stopping them from doing it now?
        If it was a law that have cops forcibly search homes than I am right there with you. But this suggestion by the cop is for morons to go along with. Sota like the folks who call 911 because the crack they bought from the crackhouse turned out to be baking soda.

        • Vagabond661

          Putting the thought out there that it’s ok for cops to search your house for guns is boiling the frog. It’s conditioning, trying to get people used to the idea.
          Soon, there will be news articles about it. It will pop up in sitcoms, magazines, books, everywhere and anywhere to get people used to the idea that it is ok for the police to come into your home and search for guns. Which is, as WTH pointed out, your constitutional right to own.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            So, in reality, this is much ado about nothing.

            The issue appears to be “what might happen?”

            Additionally, this non-action elicits terminology that is usually associated with the Nazi’s?

            I realize that hyperbole generates page visits, but certainly there are issues that are actually happening as opposed to imaginary scenarios.

          • ohio granny

            Not unlike the camel’s nose under the tent. The camel is never satisfied with just it’s nose under the tent, it wants the whole camel under the tent.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            The “camel’s nose under the tent”.
            Isn’t that the whole premise of the NRA?

          • Retired military

            I understand the idea you are stating.
            However, if people are that willing to give up their freedome they dont deserve it in the first place.

    • Retired military

      Damn I got an upvote from CHeeko. I think I will go shoot myself.

      • Shooting oneself might be a bit over the top, but it is grounds for reconsideration…

        • Retired military

          Yeah I know.
          But even a broken watch is right twice a day.

          • Only true of a mechanical 12 hour display. And 1 in 720 is overly optimistic in terms of the left being factually correct.

  • GarandFan

    As a homeowner, you DON’T KNOW if there are guns in your home?

    Who the hell have you got living with you?

    • Brucehenry

      Seems to me that it is to folks that have questionable people living with them that this offer is addressed. If you have in your house a teen gang member for a son (or one of his friends), a mental patient with a propensity for violence, a cranky old father-in-law who may be suffering from dementia and could be dangerous if armed, you may want to take advantage of the offer. Aside from those kinds of examples, though, I doubt there will be much response from the public.

      On the other hand you are right, though, Warner has jumped the shark AGAIN. Serial exaggerator, from the Pope supposedly saying Christians are just lie ISIS to Dan Savage being “Obama’s bulling czar,” it’s hardly the first time. Warner being Warner, hair-on-fire alarmism.

      • Like a typical liberal, Bruce is always ready to stand idly by and allow stupid people to give up their Constitutional rights.

        • Brucehenry

          As I said, I doubt anyone will respond beyond people in situations similar to the examples I mentioned. I bet the police chief doesn’t expect much response either.

      • Retired military

        I agree with the situations but in those types of things a reasonable person would search for stuff themselves first (especially since they would know the most likely know the hiding places) and call the cops if anything is found.
        Some folks may be infirm and cant do this but as I said above there is nothing from stopping folks calling the cops now and asking them to come look in their house.

        • Brucehenry

          It happens all the time. I personally know a woman who called the cops on her own son and had them search his room because she thought he had stolen something, and she was right.

          This chief is simply reminding folks that this option is open to them.

  • Vagabond661

    More people are killed with knives than guns. How come the cops are not offering to search your house for knives?

    Ah see that’s your answer.

    • WHO’S THE BUSTER

      From the FBI’s data on weapons utilized in the commission of a homicide in the United States:
      Firearms: 67.8%
      Knives or other cutting instruments: 13.4%
      Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.): 5.7%
      Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.): 3.9%
      Other dangerous weapons: 9.2%

      Of course I am only considering the U.S. Perhaps the numbers are different worldwide as obtaining a gun is not so easy as walking into the local Wal-Mart.

      • Retired military

        So using statistics
        In 2012 123 (give or take a few) blacks were killed by police
        In 2012 325 (give or take a few) whites were killed by police.
        Therefore whites are almost 3 times as likely to get killed by police as blacks.

        • WHO’S THE BUSTER

          I fail to see the relevance considering I was merely responding to statistics cited about a completely different subject.

          • Retired military

            The relevance is that generally the person citing statistics can pick and choose what statistics to use and what numbers to draw to bolster their argument.
            For instance does your numbers include Suicides? If no gun is handy than someone will just kill themselves with something else.
            What is the source of stats?
            Who compiled them? and using what sources?
            What was the basis for each of the numbers? Who decided the sources to get the data from?
            This is sorta like poll questions skewed by pollsters to get a desired result.
            Poll question “Which would you rather beat your mother or your sister?”

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            I thought I had mentioned it came from the FBI’s data on homicide.

            Oh well, here is the link:

            http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

          • Retired military

            You did state it came from the FBI. Still a lot of unanswered questions there.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            Considering that firearms are, well, “number one with a bullet”; parse it however you would like and I don’t think the numbers will be any less definitive.

            What is your contention?

      • Vagabond661

        Ah I stand corrected. I was going on memory on what I read at the FBI site. I believe the statistic I was remembering was so-called assault rifles vs. knives. Knives won.

        Looks like the cops are backtracking on their offer too.

  • ohio granny

    My answer to a knock at the door would be “when Hell freezes over” I will allow you in my house without a warrant. If you have a warrant I demand to call my lawyer. As far as I know the constitution has not been declared unconstitutional so I still have rights under the 2nd and 4th amendments.

    • WHO’S THE BUSTER

      It appears that they would only be knocking on your door if you, indeed, invited them.

      So what exactly is the problem?

      Do you think they should refuse the invitation? RSVP? Not conduct a search as requested?

  • Michael Lang

    Wittle Brucie – liberal fascist in training.

    • WHO’S THE BUSTER

      Ahhh…keyboard warriors.

      • Michael Lang

        Chang….chang!