I-1639 is Illegal

[Triehl27]

I don't get into politics, and I don't keyboard commando usually. But this has already undoubtablly been covered but... I was reminded of it for the first time today.

From my local police department, I-1639 is Illegal and unenforceable as written.

I went in to get the legal definition of "Secure" from a law enforcement PoV. (Point of View)

There isn't one.

First off I-1639 addresses 3 legal topics that are legally definable as different. An initiative may only address 1, ONE topic.

Secondly, Secure is not definable making 1639 unenforceable.

Secure, can be locking your front door, you have a legal expectation of security through the use of the lock on your door. REMEMBER we have legally binding signs, that say "Secure your valuables, lock your doors" Take alook around many parking lots that hand those signs... those are there to legally protect the owners of the lots.
Secure can be the expectation of the privacy of your bedroom.
Secure can be a lock.... Lock on a glass cabinet, a red plastic screw lock... etc

Secure is not defined and therefore makes the initiative unenforceable...

Both these points and other legal avenues I am sure are being addressed legally by other better versed persons and organizations.

[Wes Sage]

Yep. I fully agree with you, not to mention violation of the HIPPA act

I don't get into politics, and I don't keyboard commando usually. But this has already undoubtablly been covered but... I was reminded of it for the first time today.

From my local police department, I-1639 is Illegal and unenforceable as written.

I went in to get the legal definition of "Secure" from a law enforcement PoV. (Point of View)

There isn't one.

First off I-1639 addresses 3 legal topics that are legally definable as different. An initiative may only address 1, ONE topic.

Secondly, Secure is not definable making 1639 unenforceable.

Secure, can be locking your front door, you have a legal expectation of security through the use of the lock on your door. REMEMBER we have legally binding signs, that say "Secure your valuables, lock your doors" Take alook around many parking lots that hand those signs... those are there to legally protect the owners of the lots.
Secure can be the expectation of the privacy of your bedroom.
Secure can be a lock.... Lock on a glass cabinet, a red plastic screw lock... etc

Secure is not defined and therefore makes the initiative unenforceable...

Both these points and other legal avenues I am sure are being addressed legally by other better versed persons and organizations.

[270Win]

Gotta love politicians. "Let's create a measure we have absolutely no idea about. But it will go great!"

Honestly, I think it was just a ploy to get people to the polls, enforceable or not. This last election is rumored to have the highest turnouts among all the states.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Ledslnger]

The vague laws being created are horrible. In Hellinois a guy I used to work with....a real dipshit actually, but that is beside the point... got an AR stolen from him. I don't know Hellinois laws, except that they are borderline Nazi-like. The local Sheriff jumped him because it was in a locked building. It wasn't his house, but it was a locked building. What is the difference? It was locked. If they would have broken into his house instead and stolen it how would it have been different? It was his shop/man cave. They are not required to have a gun safe and this was just in a metal standup office cabinet(in the man cave) it sounds like. Not sure if the metal cabinet was locked or not. Still, I get the impression the cops were mad because they now had a job to do. They didn't want to even write up a report for him. Seems like all the States are making everything harder on We The People and easier on the criminals. Maybe I am off base.

[Wes Sage]

Jit the nail on the head!!
Idiot people, making idiot decisions, and more idiots voting them into law

The vague laws being created are horrible. In Hellinois a guy I used to work with....a real dipshit actually, but that is beside the point... got an AR stolen from him. I don't know Hellinois laws, except that they are borderline Nazi-like. The local Sheriff jumped him because it was in a locked building. It wasn't his house, but it was a locked building. What is the difference? It was locked. If they would have broken into his house instead and stolen it how would it have been different? It was his shop/man cave. They are not required to have a gun safe and this was just in a metal standup office cabinet(in the man cave) it sounds like. Not sure if the metal cabinet was locked or not. Still, I get the impression the cops were mad because they now had a job to do. They didn't want to even write up a report for him. Seems like all the States are making everything harder on We The People and easier on the criminals. Maybe I am off base.

[Jellyroll]

Should also start a lawsuit over HIPPA violations. Because we all know it will not be required for gun sellers to be trained in HIPPA.