What an idiot. Reading this story aloud to my wife, she suggested rather than a tax on guns, we introduce a tax on liberal stupidity.
Good luck finding a home without a gun owning neighbor in my town:)
But seriously, having a registry that tells which homes the criminals can pick up their free guns at when no one is home is an incredibly stupid idea.
Your wife is wise. The way a lot of things are in our country, a stupid tax might balance the budget.
On the other hand, it would be interesting if this comes to pass, to track crime statistics in neighborhoods shown as having lots of guns vs. those “gun free” neighborhoods.
I’d bet it’d be a great data set for the argument that guns make us safer.
Absolutely, it is a violation of privacy, and I suspect illegal as well. Gun owners are not like registered sex offenders.
You know, I do think there are a few gun free countries she could move to, and not have to worry about any crimes.
Soooo why not publish her address.
Column headline should read: “Irrational Hater with a Pen Spews More Divisive Nonsense to No Effect”
[Previous entry: Hahah. Any bets this will ultimately backfire on her? Realtors sell houses and make a living doing so. Anything that works to make a house or realtor potentially less favorable in the eyes of potential buyers cuts into the bottom line. Betting it’s a publicity stunt to kick-start a run for public office.]
Let’s map convicted criminals now. My proposal does not go directly against the Constitution either. .
Once recorded and published it would become a field guide for criminals and activists. The Anti 2nd crowd would know where to set up camp and make a nuisance of themselves. Following the slippery slope, next we could map anti 2nd addresses so the bad guys would know exactly where safe target are. But then again, WSHTF the anti gun crowd would know who to befriend.
Thinking back to my previous response- Not only are you letting criminals know which houses have firearms they can steal when no one is home, they would also know which occupied homes are defenseless if they want to stage violent home invasions.
Either way the only people I see benefiting from this proposal are criminals.
Either that or overfill it, or more likely, as they are less likely to be gainfully employed, result in us, as now, covering them financially. I have relatives that meet that requirement, so I can attest to the latter.
Not yet, but people like her clearly believe that we are.
I don’t know about CA, in FL real estate agents are only allowed to discuss physical aspects of the property. Examples of what is not allowed to discuss (you can lose your license!):
- is there a Church/Mosque/Synagogue nearby
- ethnic or racial or age make up of the neighborhood
- how many children are in the neighborhood
etc. You get the idea. So this Columnist shows how disconnected she is from reality, including one of the CA Sate Real Estate board and the profession in general. Agents want to sell houses, not label neighborhoods, and can be quite litigious if valuation of their listings is put under threat by some halfwit from some yellow rag.
I say a background check for columnist and reporters… start spouting lies lose your first amendment rights.
Didn’t they do something like a dozen years ago that you have to disclose if someone was murdered there? If asked/axed?
Since she’s an “opinion” columnist, let me offer mine. Opinions are like a**holes - everybody’s got at least ONE.
Some states require landlords to disclose such info to prospective tenants - I’ve seen failure to do so as one attempt to swindle landlords out of rent they are rightfully owed. I don’t see a reason for this, unless you believe in ghosts.
Nah. Get caught spreading BS, first offense-100 hours community service working on a farm spreading the real thing. Subsequent offenses- double the previous penalties.