Hey Washington State highroaders! I need your help.


PDA






reagansquad
September 15, 2004, 10:38 PM
I'm planning to run for Governator of Washington State in the near future. I am a liberal, however, I am very pro gun. Here are a couple of my gun related campaign points;

- use a small amount of homeland security $ to buy a few hundred SKS rifles and some 7.62x39mm ammo. Then make these rifles available to the public, free of charge with membership into the state militaia I will be creating. There will probably be a few hoops to jump through, but with the national guard thinned out so much, it might come in handy to make sure we have a few volunteers in case of massive riots or invasion by Canada. (haha)

The process will probably be something like; show up, go through 1 saturday of training, background checks, signing of a contract, and range time etc. (I am mixed on background checks for regular firearms, but for state issued ones it should probably be mandatory.) Then walk away with a standard SKS and 50 rounds of ammo. (if anyone can suggest a better, cheaper rifle, please do so.)


-The other thing I may be interested in doing is getting rid of Washington State's ban on machine guns... Or at least making it so that there is a liscensing process. As a military historian, I am unable to catalog and collect most military rifles from the last 60 years.

-Carry allowed on college campuses in the state... w/ liscense only, of course. Students with CPLs would be allowed to store locked rifles in their dorm rooms or college owned apartments.

Any other gun laws you think Washington needs?

I am really hoping to be a good candidate that a big chunk of the population can agree on. I'm liberal, but I'm not one of those stupid Diane Feinstein liberals... If you have any questions about me or my candidacy, please ask.

If you enjoyed reading about "Hey Washington State highroaders! I need your help." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jamz
September 15, 2004, 11:38 PM
Here's a big one- taxes. Up or down? :)

-James

reagansquad
September 16, 2004, 12:07 AM
heh... I personally believe in a flat tax on expendable income, though not at the state level. I'm a big fan of not having state income tax.

I'm also a big fan of finding ways to find alternate funding... Like legalized gambling, perhaps a Vegas style legalization of certain types of entertainment, and other things that adults should be able to do because this is a free country. I'm not a fan at all of taxing the crap out of tobacco like they do here. If it's going to be perfectly ok to sell a legal, yet heavily addictive recreational drug which contributes millions to political campaigns, that's one thing... But penalizing those who have become addicted to it, some of which were targetted as children PURPOSELY, that's different.

priv8ter
September 16, 2004, 12:17 AM
Are we talking 2008? Because this time around I'm trying to decide between Dino Rossi(Realistic Choice) or Ruth Bennett(Idealistic Choice).

Also...what other background do you have? With the new blanket primary...you would really have to be some special kind of Democrat to get me to give up the right to vote for either a Republican or a Libertarian in the Primary...

but...I'm more likely to vote for you than Ron Sims.

greg

Stickjockey
September 16, 2004, 12:27 AM
Reagansquad-

I don't know; you're startin' to sound more libertarian to me.:D

How about working on CCW reciprocity with Oregon?

klover
September 16, 2004, 01:07 AM
it required all Washingtonians to be armed:neener: :evil: :neener:

reagansquad
September 16, 2004, 01:28 AM
either '08 or 2012. I haven't decided yet. Suppose the NRA would help fund me? :-)

Forgot to mention, voluntary (i.e. parents could sign their kids out of it) gun safety in public schools... i.e. 4 rules day. Everyone everywhere should know the 4 rules.

I am sort of like a libertarian... Just not on health care, education, workers rights and a couple of other things like that. If you look at what happened to this country during and after the industrial revolution, you would agree with me. :-)


Reciprocity with Oregon would be a dream come true. If they'd go for it I would... My REAL goal would be reciprocity with CALIFORNIA and Canada. :)

Klover; Requiring everyone to be armed doesn't sound so hot to me. If someone does not want to own a firearm, they shouldn't have to... writing an open letter asking all willing and legal citizens to buy a rifle and ammo wouldn't be a bad idea though.

cracked butt
September 16, 2004, 01:43 AM
I'm not sure about the whole SKS business, some people, especially antis, might object to commie guns.:eek:

I have no idea what Washington state is like, but if you moved to Wisconsin, a pro-gun liberal would be very electable. We've had nothing but liberal to moderate Governors for years, and none have been pro-gun.:banghead:

Langenator
September 16, 2004, 07:41 AM
-With your SKS's for the state militia, it'd probably be a good idea for every militia member to show up at least once a year and prove a) that the rifle was still in working order; and b) that they can still hit a requisitie number of targets with it.

-Alaska style concealed carry-ie, not permit required for state residents, but you can still get one for purposes of carrying in other states.

-End the handgun waiting period.

-AFAIK, concealed carry is legal on state university campuses. The law specifically mentions elementary and secondary schools as off limits, but not universities. I know I've taken mine to UW before.

Non-gun stuff

-Eliminate all state drug laws. I know it'd still be against federal law, but then the Feds have to do all the work, and WA cops can worry about other stuff. Oh, and make sure you insert a clause that says if you do drugs, you alone are responsible for the consequences of your actions.

-Make Seattle and any other locality that's doing that stupid illegal immigrant 'sanctuary' ???? knock it off. Besides, denying various welfare state benefits to illegals will save a buttload of money, which would let you lower taxes, and you'd be everyone's hero. Even Tim Eyman.

George S.
September 16, 2004, 11:21 AM
I think as long as the Western side of the mountains control the tempo and direction of the Legislature, you will face an uphill battle. The Seattle Dem's have waaay too much influnce on state politics (THANK GOD that Ron Sims got his butt kicked in the primary!) and I don't see any realistic changes in the future.

Just out of curiosity, what would the purpose of a "state militia" be? What would be the qualifications to join or enlist? And what authority would they have and under who's control? The National Guard is the sort of de facto state militia and is under the control of the Governor through the Commanding General of the Military Department which is a cabinet-level position.

As far as a CCW reciprocity agreement with Oregon, the current WA law requires a agreement on both sides and OR CCW process has to meet the WA procedures. Should Oregon choose to not honor a WA permit (and they most likely would not honor a WA permit at this time) that whole thing probably ain't gonna happen.

Bobarino
September 16, 2004, 01:41 PM
interersing concept, but unless i knew where you stood on things like taxes, minimum wage, gas tax, roads, small business taxes, and a host of other issues, i'd reserve my vote. guns aren't the only things that matter to me.

that said, i'd like to see the ban on SBR's, machine guns and supressors lifted.

you militia idea might run itno some obstacles being as this exists in the Washington State Constitution:

"SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.
The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this Section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men. "

i don't know if that would apply to your plan or not, but there's also this to consider:

"ARTICLE X
MILITIA

SECTION 1 WHO LIABLE TO MILITARY DUTY.
All able-bodied male citizens of this state between the ages of eighteen (18) and forty-five (45) years except such as are exempt by laws of the United States or by the laws of this state, shall be liable to military duty.

SECTION 2 ORGANIZATION - DISCIPLINE - OFFICERS - POWER TO CALL OUT.
The legislature shall provide by law for organizing and disciplining the militia in such manner as it may deem expedient, not incompatible with the Constitution and laws of the United States. Officers of the militia shall be elected or appointed in such manner as the legislature shall from time to time direct and shall be commissioned by the governor. The governor shall have power to call forth the militia to execute the laws of the state to suppress insurrections and repel invasions.

SECTION 3 SOLDIERS' HOME.
The legislature shall provide by law for the maintenance of a soldiers' home for honorably discharged Union soldiers, sailors, marines and members of the state militia disabled while in the line of duty and who are bona fide citizens of the state.

SECTION 4 PUBLIC ARMS.
The legislature shall provide by law, for the protection and safe keeping of the public arms.

SECTION 5 PRIVILEGE FROM ARREST.
The militia shall, in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at musters and elections of officers, and in going to and returning from the same.

SECTION 6 EXEMPTION FROM MILITARY DUTY.
No person or persons, having conscientious scruples against bearing arms, shall be compelled to do militia duty in time of peace: Provided, such person or persons shall pay an equivalent for such exemption."


sounds like the state gov't can maintain a militia but individuals and corporations cannot.

if you're going to arm us all, don't cheap out, get us some (X)M-8's!

Bobby

reagansquad
September 16, 2004, 02:33 PM
Gas tax down, minimum wage up, small business tax down.

A lot of people are under the false impression that either nobody has to live off of minimum wage or that having the minimum wage increased hurts employment numbers. This is simply untrue. The increase in money being spent due to a minimum wage increase results in higher demand for goods and thus more people are employed to create those goods and everyone is making more money off of the situation.

Gatofeo
September 16, 2004, 03:03 PM
I was born and raised in Washington State ... how about forced deportation of all Californians and Easterners who haven't established at least 20 years of continual residency? :D
Elimination of state liquor stores and let the private sector sell it.
Death penalty for arson, or any act that results in a death, done in the name of the environment (That ought to take care of those ELF lowlifes).
A cap on the number of laywers allowed to practice in the state.
Put all the developers against the wall (Oh wait ... that's my plan for the 2nd American Revolution ... kinda got ahead of myself there ... heh :D )
Eliminate tax-free status of churches.
Legalized gambling.
Legalized prostitution
Voluntary firearms safety education in the schools.
Reduce the state taxes.
Reduce the welfare system of the state. Those who can work, should have to pick up litter, attend class or do yard work for the elderly and disabled veterans.
Probable death penalty if you kill someone. At least 30 years in prison should be served. Mandatory if you get out and kill again.
Mandatory death penalty for those who manufacture or distribute harmful, dangerous drugs such as methamphetamine, heroin, opium or the like.
Game law violators must walk the breadth of the city carrying a sign: "I'm a poacher! I Stole Your Wild Game!"
Jail time and mandatory fine for anyone who abuses an animal (and stupidity is not a defense, as in, "Well, gee, I knew it was 20 degrees below zero out there but he's got a fur coat. I thought he'd be okay).
Rework the awful State Song into a newer one, with a section in it where you HAVE to fart or belch (that ought to keep the uppity liberals out!).
Turn golf courses into shooting ranges.
Build a huge landing pad for UFOs. Anyone who shows up to watch the UFO landing --- deport them back to California. It's my idea of a Moron Trap.
Mandatory prison sentences for any attorney or police officer found to have fabricated evidence, or tampered with it, resulting in an innocent man being sent to prison.
Life-long loss of numerous rights for anyone convicted of a felony. Including the loss of the right to vote, possess or fire a firearm, run for public office or hold a government job. After 10 years of keeping your nose clean, a board can review a felon's petition for some restoration of rights --- but I would not include possession of firearms among these rights.

Andrew Rothman
September 16, 2004, 04:11 PM
I am sort of like a libertarian... Just not on health care, education, workers rights and a couple of other things like that.

And an elephant is sort of like an automobile, just not when it comes to wheels, engines, windows and seats, and a couple other things like that. :D

A libertarian believes that he doesn't have the right to tell others what to do, provided that they are not harming anyone.

A libertarian believes that all people must be free to enter into contracts and agreements of their own choosing.

A libertarian believes in keeping the government out of all but the most basic things, such as miliutary defense and internal policing to prevent folks from harming others.

So in what way, exactly, are you anything like a libertarian?

pax
September 16, 2004, 04:33 PM
Wow, Washington's minimum wage (already the
highest minimum wage in the nation (http://www.aflcio.org/yourjobeconomy/minimumwage/staterates.cfm)) isn't high enough for you?

Minimum-wage law has no effect, or minimal effect, on unemployment? (http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/50years.htm) (Washington, by the way, has one of the highest unemployment rates (http://www.bls.gov/lau/home.htm) in the nation, right around 6% last I looked. ... but I'm sure that's not related...)

I won't be voting for you.

pax

Do you let the Johnson boy mow your lawn for $10 bucks? Don't you realize that's exploiting him?!? The Smith boy said he'd do it for $25! -- Tamara on THR

Unisaw
September 16, 2004, 05:13 PM
reagansquad,

You're saying that it is good for the government to manipulate market prices (e.g., the price of labor)?:scrutiny:

Sorry, I don't buy it. I suggest that you research your position further.

reagansquad
September 16, 2004, 05:27 PM
"I was born and raised in Washington State ... how about forced deportation of all Californians and Easterners who haven't established at least 20 years of continual residency?"
If only that was a viable and constitutional option. :)

"Elimination of state liquor stores and let the private sector sell it."
Yes

"Death penalty for arson, or any act that results in a death, done in the name of the environment (That ought to take care of those ELF lowlifes)."
I am against the death penalty simply because it costs the state more money than simply putting people away for life. Also, in this paticular case, I don't believe the ELF has ever been responsible for a casualty. If you can find me a news story, I'd appreciate it.

"A cap on the number of laywers allowed to practice in the state."
Supply and demand. More lawyers should, in theory, = lower costs.

"Put all the developers against the wall (Oh wait ... that's my plan for the 2nd American Revolution ... kinda got ahead of myself there ... heh )"
Can't do it.

"Eliminate tax-free status of churches."
Agreed. Especially ones involved in politics.

"Legalized gambling."
yes

"Legalized prostitution"
Yes, though heavily regulated for public health and safety reasons.

"Voluntary firearms safety education in the schools."
yes

"Reduce the state taxes."
taxes on gambling and prostitution should help make this possible.

"Reduce the welfare system of the state. Those who can work, should have to pick up litter, attend class or do yard work for the elderly and disabled veterans."
I agree that welfare shouldn't be a free check. Those receiving welfare should have to be either doing a public service, actively seeking a job, performing volunteer work, or persuing an education/training.


"Probable death penalty if you kill someone. At least 30 years in prison should be served. Mandatory if you get out and kill again."
I'm against the death penalty simply because it is more expensive to the state. It's a waste of money. Life in prison is just as effective at taking those sorts out of society.

"Mandatory death penalty for those who manufacture or distribute harmful, dangerous drugs such as methamphetamine, heroin, opium or the like."
If someone wants to do drugs in their basement, that's none of my business. If someone on drugs commits a crime while under the influence of those drugs, I believe in harsh penalties.

"Game law violators must walk the breadth of the city carrying a sign: "I'm a poacher! I Stole Your Wild Game!"
I don't think this is harsh enough.

"Jail time and mandatory fine for anyone who abuses an animal (and stupidity is not a defense, as in, "Well, gee, I knew it was 20 degrees below zero out there but he's got a fur coat. I thought he'd be okay).
Rework the awful State Song into a newer one, with a section in it where you HAVE to fart or belch (that ought to keep the uppity liberals out!)."
How about a public flogging and 1,000,000 hours community service for the humain society?

"Turn golf courses into shooting ranges."
A lot of nice people play golf.

"Build a huge landing pad for UFOs. Anyone who shows up to watch the UFO landing --- deport them back to California. It's my idea of a Moron Trap."
No... This could be better accomplished at the federal level. ;)

"Mandatory prison sentences for any attorney or police officer found to have fabricated evidence, or tampered with it, resulting in an innocent man being sent to prison."
How about life for this? That's the worst crime that could be committed.

"Life-long loss of numerous rights for anyone convicted of a felony. Including the loss of the right to vote, possess or fire a firearm, run for public office or hold a government job. After 10 years of keeping your nose clean, a board can review a felon's petition for some restoration of rights --- but I would not include possession of firearms among these rights."
I believe in striving to reform most criminals. A reformed man who's done his time deserves a second chance, but maybe not a 3rd.

---------------------------------------------------------

And an elephant is sort of like an automobile, just not when it comes to wheels, engines, windows and seats, and a couple other things like that.

"A libertarian believes that he doesn't have the right to tell others what to do, provided that they are not harming anyone."
I totally agree with this philosophy. That is the definition of a free country IMHO. A place where you can do anything you want as long as it isn't hurting anyone.

"A libertarian believes that all people must be free to enter into contracts and agreements of their own choosing."
I also agree, however, there are certain circumstances where those in power are able to collectively bargain against those who have no power and no allies.

"A libertarian believes in keeping the government out of all but the most basic things, such as miliutary defense and internal policing to prevent folks from harming others."
Government should be there when you need it, and gone when you don't.

=---------------------------

"Wow, Washington's minimum wage (already the
highest minimum wage in the nation) isn't high enough for you?

Minimum-wage law has no effect, or minimal effect, on unemployment? (Washington, by the way, has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation, right around 6% last I looked. ... but I'm sure that's not related...)

I won't be voting for you."

Gee, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that there is no major industry in Eastern Washington aside from struggling agriculture. And actually the highest minimum wage in the nation is in Santa Cruz california where they have one of the lowest poverty levels in the nation. And as far as Washington State's minimum wage being 'high enough', can YOU make a living off of $7 per hour?

Langenator
September 16, 2004, 05:58 PM
Santa Cruz has an extremely low poverty rate simply because poor people can't afford to live there. I'm sure you'll find plenty of poor folks in nearby Watsonville.

I'm kind of curious as to why you think Washington needs higher minimum wage when places like McDonalds in Seattle are already paying higher than minimum wage to teenage burger flippers. And I distinctly remember walking into the Fred Meyer in Issaquah in June and seeing a Help Wanted sign advertising between $14-19/hour for cashiers. That's $14-19 an hour to swipe stuff over a bar code reader.

And just so you know, one of the reasons agriculture in Eastern Washington is struggling is because the idiot legislature insists on setting the minimum wage according to the cost of living in Seattle, the most expensive city in the state.

And yes, it is possible to live on $7 an hour. You won't have a nice place to live, or a nice car, or get to go out to dinner much, but it can be done. Raising a family on minimum wage is quite difficult, but if you are so bereft of marketable skills that the only jobs you can get and hold only pay minimum wage, maybe you shouldn't be starting a family in the first place. It's called responsibility.

Bobarino
September 16, 2004, 05:59 PM
Reagansquad,


the minimum wage is not, and was not ever intended to be a living wage. its an entry level wage for new workers and unskilled laborers. i own and operate a small business and the more minimum wage is raised, the more i have to pay aout of my pocket to social security and unemployment both state and federal. a $7/hr employee ends up costing closer to $13/hr by the time all the taxes are factored in. if you plan on raising minimum wage in an effort to create jobs, you just lost my vote despite all of the other things i agree with you on. i'd suggest you brush up on your basic economics with regards to your wage plan.

Bobby

Dain Bramage
September 16, 2004, 07:26 PM
""Game law violators must walk the breadth of the city carrying a sign: "I'm a poacher! I Stole Your Wild Game!"
I don't think this is harsh enough."

Have you read the hunting regulations in this state? I have unwittingly broken the game laws, and only found out later when rereading the pamphlet (a book, really).

reagansquad
September 16, 2004, 07:51 PM
"I'm kind of curious as to why you think Washington needs higher minimum wage when places like McDonalds in Seattle are already paying higher than minimum wage to teenage burger flippers. "

...because in Eastern Washington, a lot of people are working for minimum wage and trying to make a living at it.

reagansquad
September 16, 2004, 07:53 PM
Dain, I'm talking about blatant hunting off season, etc. Game laws should probably be relatively simple.

pax
September 16, 2004, 08:03 PM
Ah, well in that case, let's just raise the minimum wage in Washington to ... oh, say $100/hour.

Shall we? I'd sure like to make $100/hr and it'd be great if I could earn that just for grunt work.

pax

It doesn't make any difference how much money you make, your wife can spend it all. -- Bill McDaniel

atek3
September 16, 2004, 09:12 PM
A lot of people are under the false impression that either nobody has to live off of minimum wage or that having the minimum wage increased hurts employment numbers. This is simply untrue. The increase in money being spent due to a minimum wage increase results in higher demand for goods and thus more people are employed to create those goods and everyone is making more money off of the situation.

If I drank milk it would be shooting out of my nose right now.

Yusein the majickal gubbermint wand we can make eberyone richer just by telling busynesses to raise wages. :rolleyes:

uh huh.

http://www.mises.org/econsense/ch36.asp
http://www.mises.org/humanaction/chap30sec3.asp
http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=1577
http://www.mises.org/efandi/ch13.asp


By raising wages artificially above the marginal product of unskilled worker's labor, many workers are "priced out of the market" or in layman speak, FIRED. Imagine for a second you own a widget company. Someone who dropped out of high school can assemble 1 widget per hour on average, and each widget will earn the company say 6 dollars. Paying a wage of 5 dollars an hour, it is profitable to hirer said employee. Raise the minimum wage to 7 dollars and suddenly the employee becomes a liability and thus won't be hired. Before you try and counter that they can just add it to the costs of their products...generally they can't do that because of competition and even if they could the increase of costs and services would basically mitigate the goal of the increased minimum wage, increasing the 'purchasing power of poor people'. The ONE study which showed no connection between minimum wage increases and unemployement was a telephone study of fast food joints in new jersey. When the study was repeated using payroll and labor dept numbers, the original study was proven to be shlock. If raising the minimum wage was good for people than why don't we raise it to ten dollars, or twenty, or ten thousand. The answer is that the minimum wage benefits those who can get a job AT that wage, those who can't for one reason or another (no education, poor work record, etc.) then become unemployeed and have to go on welfare (requiring taxes on people that do work). The truth is that minimum wage jobs are "entry level", get a minimum wage job, work hard, stay clean, and in 3 years I guarantee you'll be making a 'living wage'. Even the government's statistics: http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2002.htm
show that a vanishingly small percentage of people are 'trying to raise a family' earn the minimum wage. (mainly because western governments (US and europe) have allowed inflation to lower the real minimum wage over time...thus decreasing its harmful effects)


The bottom line is, increasing the minimum way is a compassionate sounding term for cutting off the bottom rungs of the ladder to prosperity.

atek3

Telperion
September 16, 2004, 10:02 PM
Let's play a little game:

Suppose Bob works for a fast food chain at minimum wage. Between flipping burgers he has some time to think about the minimum wage law and does some calculations:

If the minimum wage is $8/hr, he'll make $16640/yr.
If the minimum wage is $9/hr, he'll make $18720/yr.
If the minimum wage is $10/hr, he'll make $20800/yr.
If the minimum wage is $15/hr, he'll make $31200/yr.
If the minimum wage is $20/hr, he'll make $41600/yr.
If the minimum wage is $30/hr, he'll make $62400/yr.
If the minimum wage is $50/hr, he'll make $104000/yr.

Did you follow Bob's reasoning all the way to the last line, and if not, at what point did you stop following him? How high can the wage floor go before Bob is caught up in inevitable unemployment?

The dirty little secret of minimum wage laws is that they have no effect on raising real wages. Why do you think real wages go up, anyway? Do you think it's because the government says so? No, real wages go up because a worker's labor becomes more valuable, i.e. he's more productive. How does that happen? To be brief, a rise in productivity requires capital investment, to research and develop better training and processes. How does government price fixing help improve productivity or spur investment? Oh, it doesn't.

Old Dog
September 16, 2004, 10:20 PM
How about making a law requiring people in this state to actually use their turn signals, (believe it or not, those devices come standard with all motor vehicles)? What? It's already a law? Must be those durn Californians who moved up here 'cause there's no state income tax ...

Speaking of Californians, let's have a law prohibiting them from driving on the 405 when it's raining until they've established 10 years of residency ...

Yeah, and what's up with those fishing & hunting regs? GMUs? WFT, O?You go a couple miles and the season ends a month earlier, or there's a different size limit or bag limit ... And why is it you cross the pass and it's like you're in a different state?

Let's work on those zoning ordinances that seem to require a Starbucks on every block ...

I don't care what the minimum wage in this state is, when I go to Mickey D's, I want my Big Mac in less than 15 minutes ...

Pass a law prohibiting those folks from Bainbridge Island from wearing socks with their Birkenstocks ... egad, the humanity ...

Andrew Rothman
September 18, 2004, 11:37 AM
"A libertarian believes that he doesn't have the right to tell others what to do, provided that they are not harming anyone."
I totally agree with this philosophy. That is the definition of a free country IMHO. A place where you can do anything you want as long as it isn't hurting anyone.

So then why do you think, if I'm willing to pay $4/hr, and Bob is willing to work for it, the government has any right to tell us we can't have that arrangement?

A libertarian believes that all people must be free to enter into contracts and agreements of their own choosing.
I also agree, however, there are certain circumstances where those in power are able to collectively bargain against those who have no power and no allies.
What do you mean? And, see above.

BluesBear
September 19, 2004, 02:46 AM
But then again if this were located under Roundtable where it belongs i would never have seen it.

It would be positively wonderful to have a strongly pro-gun/RKBA Governator in our state.

But the "state militia" idea will NEVER fly. The logistics of overseeing such a group are mind boggling. And the liability aspect? Fugedaboudit.


Perhaps a much simpler method would be more effectice?
Such as...

Lobby for legislation that would make the cost of any .223 or .308 semi-automatic detachable magazine rifle such as AR-15, Mini-14, AR-180B, H&K 93, M1A, AR-10, FN-FAL, H&K 91 etc tax exempt. That would be all taxes from state and local sales tax all the way up tp Federal Income Tax. Make those same tax exemptions available for ammunition and accessories. This would encourage ownership of Homeland Defense Rifles and stimulate part of the economy.

You could offer the same exemptions for .45acp and 9mm pistols as well as .50 BMG rifles.

You could then promote participation in the Civilian Marksmanship Program. You would then have a sizeable body of people armed and capable of using military style weapons. (Remember the "rifleman behind every blade of grass" thingy from WWII?)

Then have the state buy surplus military ammunition and offer it to Washington residents at a deep discounted yet reasonable price.
This would also create a source of revenue for the state.

This revenue could be used to create a real firearms safety curriculum, based on the "Gunproof Your Children" philosophy, that could be started in elementary schools and continued through secondary schools. Firearms education is just as important as sex education. Both are life and death concerns.

Also:

ALLOW OPEN CARRY!

Vermont style carry added to the existing CCW regulations (just like Alaska) would be nice. Make it lawful for those people who do possess a Concealed Pistol License to carry ANYWHERE! ANYTIME!
Expand the CPL to include all dangerous or deadly weapons.

Yes! to eliminating the state ban of selective fire weapons. The Federal hoops you have to jump through to own one are more than adequate.
(Point of order, as it is, Short Barreled Rifles are NOT forbidden in WA state.)

This is all I could think of right now. I am sure there would be a few bugs that would have to be workedout but I think these are realistically possible.


However, I feel that the actual possibility of anyone having enough balls to campaign agressively making gun owners rights a high priority and still be ultimately electable is highly unlikely. Perhaps such a person does exist. If so, I would be one of the first in line to become a campaign worker.


Just my opinion and it's worth EXACTLY what youi paid for it.

Langenator
September 19, 2004, 08:59 AM
Bluesbear-

Open carry is already legal in WA. It just scares the sheeple, that's all.

George S.
September 19, 2004, 12:09 PM
I know that the issue of open carry in WA has been discussed before, but where in RCW 9.41 does it specifically state that the carrying of a weapon that is not concealed is perfectly legal?? Is your statement based on the fact that it does not say open carry is illegal?

You are right about how the perception of people seeing a gun in open view (and for discussion, this is more about handguns than long guns) could result in being questioned by law enforcement but I for one would not even consider doing that if the result would be ongoing confrontation. Guess that's one reason why I have my CCW. :D

If the apparent attitude of LEO's is that you are up to no particular good by openly carrying, then why risk confrontation? Clearly trying this in Seattle or Tacoma or any of the major WA cities, you would expect this to happen. And there are some cities that can very well have ordinances or counties that have codes that expressly prohibit open carry. If there is no specific RCW or WAC that prohibits open carry, then cities and counties could be free to establish such laws within those jurisdictions.

BluesBear
September 19, 2004, 02:11 PM
Since I had moved from a state where open carry needed no permit but concealed carry did, I asked about open carry when I applied for my CPL.
I was told in no uncertain terms that it was NOT allowed and could even be construed as brandishing.

carpettbaggerr
September 19, 2004, 05:10 PM
Yeah, raise the minimum wage to $10,000 an hour and I'll vote for you. I'll work for a month and retire. Sounds like a plan to me. No, wait -- make it $50,000/hr and I'll only have to work for a week! Not your money anyway, is it?


You got my vote. Really.

reagansquad
September 19, 2004, 07:00 PM
The goal is to raises the minimum wage to level where a minimum wage earner would still spend 100% of their income. That way, all money goes straight back into the economy, but minimum wage earners are still making enough to get by. You aren't going to change my mind on this... so....

FROM NOW ON I WILL ONLY BE TAKING MINIMUM WAGE SUGGESTIONS FROM THOSE WHO ARE CURRENTLY EARNING MINIMUM WAGE. Thank you. :neener:

BluesBear
September 21, 2004, 06:13 AM
FROM NOW ON I WILL ONLY BE LISTENING TO THOSE CANDIDATES WHOSE ECONOMIC POLICIES ARE BASED IN THE VICINITY OF REALITY. Thank you. :neener:

pax
September 21, 2004, 11:36 AM
Reagansquad ~

Good, you should be listening to me, then. :D

Langenator ~

It is not quite that simple. The specific legal language is found in RCW 9.41.270, under the heading, "Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm -- Unlawful carrying or handling -- Penalty -- Exceptions."

The statute reads, (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.
The sting is found in the phrase, "... that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons."

If you alarm a passerby (and you will if you are inside city limits, or anywhere within a few dozen miles of Seattle and its suburbs), then your open carrying was against the law.

If you carry openly and no one is alarmed by it, then you apparently were doing it at a time and place, and under circumstances, where there either weren't any sheeple, or where the sheeple expected to see such behavior, and therefore it wasn't against the law.

Violating this particular law is a gross misdemeanor, punishable by loss of your CPL if you've got one.

There are a couple of exceptions. Cops, soldiers, and other public employees can open carry. Open carry is specifically legal in your fixed place of business (eg, four walls and a ceiling -- not your car if you're a taxi driver, not your booth if you're an itinerant salesman).

And check this out -- the act does not apply to: (c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;
Which means that if you pull your gun out for the express purpose of defending yourself when A,O,J are all present, you don't have to actually fire the gun in order for it to be self-defense and protected by law.

pax

pax
September 21, 2004, 12:31 PM
If there is no specific RCW or WAC that prohibits open carry, then cities and counties could be free to establish such laws within those jurisdictions.
George S ~

Not true. Washington has statewide pre-emption. That means that cities and counties may not pass laws governing the use of firearms; the state has claimed that right for itself.

The specific legal language is found in RCW RCW 9.41.290:
The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.

So the controlling language will be found in the RCWs, not in any city or county ordinance. According to RCW 9.41.300, (2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

(a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. .... -- but that's not the same thing as a law restricting possession or carry, which falls under state law only.

A city, town, county, or other municipality may pass a law restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center which is operated by the city, town, county, or other municipality. But if they do so, the restriction cannot apply to CPL holders who are legally carrying concealed.

In other words, if they pass an ordinance that says you can't carry in the city convention center, it doesn't apply to you as a CPL holder. This one is routinely violated by cities thinking they can get away with it, and routinely cows CPL holders who don't realize the "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" signs do not apply to them.

And they can't pass laws about open carry. The state has claimed that right for itself.

pax

Andrew Rothman
September 21, 2004, 01:23 PM
FROM NOW ON I WILL ONLY BE TAKING MINIMUM WAGE SUGGESTIONS FROM THOSE WHO ARE CURRENTLY EARNING MINIMUM WAGE. Thank you.

With logic like that, I'd be loathe to vote for you.

Did it occur to you that the minimum wage affects other people too? Like the businesses that will shut down because they can't pay it? Or the other, better-paid employees that will be laid off? Or the new workers (immigrants, children) who won't be able to get any sort of job in your new feel-good economy?

Good luck with the campaign.

BluesBear
September 21, 2004, 05:28 PM
reagansquad said;
I'm planning to run for Governator of Washington State in the near future.

Matt Payne, no need to worry about voting for him. Since he is only 23 it will be the very distant future before his name will appear on a Gubernatorial ballot.
Perhaps by then he will becone able to grasp the basics of real life economics.

If you enjoyed reading about "Hey Washington State highroaders! I need your help." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!