Wait, let me clarify -- I am completely down with the police siezing the huge horkin' stash of guns and ammo. What concerns me is: I'm not sure, based on the article, whether there was any other grounds to search his house other than the stuff he said online. If there was, then cool.

But if all they had to go on was what he said online -- well, what's to stop police from pointing to any obnoxious shit any of us may have said sarcastically, and using that as an excuse to search our houses?

I'll grant you that I'm very much in the err-on-the-side-of-permissiveness camp when it comes to the First Amendment, though.