Quantcast
Washington State I-594 is Firearm Registration - Page 2 - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Social Situations > Activism

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 11, 2013, 06:53 PM   #26
JDBoardman
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 12, 2008
Location: Dallas-Ft Worth Metroplex
Posts: 80
"Isn't the 2nd Amendment "written permission"? In what way is this possibly Constitutional.."

^ NO! The 2nd Amendment is an affirmation of a right, NOT permission granted by another human.

This is incorrect on BOTH accounts. We all need, as first principle, to understand that the Constitution is not a guarantor of our rights. Our rights derive from natural law, that is, from the condition of being a living, breathing human being. The United States Constitution, perhaps the most brilliant document ever written, is a series of limits on the actions of the Federal Government. The Constitution, from Article I to the 27th Amendment, restricts what government is allowed to do. We, the people, are not 'allowed' to own weapons, the Federal Government 'shall not infringe', that is, RESTRICT, our naturally existing right to keep and bear arms. We need no one's 'written permission' to exercise these natural rights - we can only surrender these rights, and even in doing so, we merely forego the ability to exercise these rights - the right itself does not cease to exist.

Now this of course presupposes a moral government, one that lives within its Constitutionally defined limits. This is something we no longer have, so by extension, our government has breached its covenant with its citizens, and we are no longer morally obligated to live within the dictates of the government. Since the government will then resort to enforcing its dictates by force (or threat of force) what we now have is no longer a Republic but Tyranny.
__________________
"I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will not live my life for the sake of another man, nor request that he live his for mine"
John Galt
JDBoardman is offline  
Old November 12, 2013, 07:56 PM   #27
Dave Workman
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 6, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 419
Oh, my...where to begin?

First. thanks to everyone for their interest in the dueling initiatives..

I-594 is a 15-page gun control measure that would set up a far-reaching state level background check.

I-591 is a one-page measure that mandates that state background checks comply with a uniform national standard, and it also prohibits government gun confiscations without due process (anybody remember Hurricane Katrina?)

So, in answer to someone's earlier query: The "uniform national standard" that..as correctly pointed out..exists with the NICS system is the one to which the checks would have to continue complying.

Now..while it is nice to pontificate about the 2A being the only paperwork someone needs, and "shall not be infringed" means what it says, we all know — regardless whether we "like" it or not — that this is not the reality in any of the 50 states. Before anyone bites my head off as a "traitor" for even suggesting this, I'm not endorsing any of these laws, just saying that they exist and we live with and abide by them, like it or not.

What I-591 is attempting to do is prevent gun prohibitionists from adding more red tape and bureaucracy to the process in Washington state. The people backing I-594 are well-funded, and Michael Bloomberg hasn't even weighed in yet with any of his millions of $$$$$.

I've been writing about the dueling initiatives for months on my Examiner.com column, as many here know because they read my stuff regularly. Those who do should share the links now and then so everybody else can keep up.

I-591 has the backing of the Washington Arms Collectors, Washington State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Hunters Heritage Council, Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors' Assn., and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

I-594 has the backing of a bunch of rich characters in Seattle and along the I-5 corridor, but mainly Seattle. Plus the usual anti-gun suspects.


I-591 could use all the $upport it can get, and that mean$ contribution$ to the campaign fund. It i$ that $imple. Find out more by clicking here

Keep your eyes on the Seattle Gun Rights Examiner column. I'll continue covering this battle as it unfolds.
Dave Workman is offline  
Old November 12, 2013, 07:59 PM   #28
stressed
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 6, 2013
Posts: 734
Civil war era and before, you could walk right up to that liberal and challenge him to a duel, weather it be with blades, rifles or pistols. In fact it was a common occurrence among senators - republican against democrat and vice versa.

He wins, you sign the petition and surrender to registration. You win, the matter is squashed indefinitely.
stressed is offline  
Old November 14, 2013, 05:51 PM   #29
Dave Workman
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 6, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 419
Stressed:

Alas, that may have been another time in another place... perhaps a fantasy place that is Gone With The Wind...

but the reality is we're here, and we're here now.

And as I wrote today, Bill Gates has just ponied up with $25K.

This ain't good.
Dave Workman is offline  
Old November 14, 2013, 07:17 PM   #30
savage1r
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2009
Posts: 322
Dave, I just want to say thank you for all the hard work you and your publication have been doing fighting for our rights over on the other side of the state. I hope that the video I produced can help out in some way to raise awareness of washington voters and get that awful piece of legislation voted down.
__________________
Check out my YouTube page at: http://www.youtube.com/user/savage1r
savage1r is offline  
Old November 21, 2013, 08:09 PM   #31
2bfree
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 203
Petitions turned in today for I-591
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/G...232861581.html
2bfree is offline  
Old December 4, 2013, 01:35 PM   #32
col_temp
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 14, 2012
Location: Seattle Metro Area, WA
Posts: 236
Thanks Dave,
There have been several great summaries in the WAC magazines over the past couple of months.
%94 is as bad as you could possibly think it would be. (And there is no LEO provision in so they would be just as limited and everyone else!)

Keep getting the message out and getting the petitions signed.
__________________
Paris
No one can ever be too prepared.
"A prudent man sees evil and hides himself, The naive proceed and pay the penalty." Prov. 27:12
col_temp is offline  
Old December 4, 2013, 02:23 PM   #33
col_temp
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 14, 2012
Location: Seattle Metro Area, WA
Posts: 236
For those of you who want more details:

https://washingtonarmscollectors.org/i-594-is-bad-law/

Point by point breakdown of all the problems with 594...
__________________
Paris
No one can ever be too prepared.
"A prudent man sees evil and hides himself, The naive proceed and pay the penalty." Prov. 27:12
col_temp is offline  
Old December 12, 2013, 12:07 PM   #34
David4516
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 29, 2003
Location: Yelm, WA
Posts: 940
I'm confused though, is this going to the voters or directly to the state senate?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...e-legislature/

"Washington allows citizens to file two types of initiatives: One puts a matter directly to a vote of the people, while the other puts an issue before the legislature. If the legislature doesn’t vote to pass the measure, it then goes to the next general election ballot. I-594 is the second type.

Supporters said they pursued an initiative to the legislature because groundwork had been laid during this year’s legislative session."

Sounds like we should be calling our reps...
David4516 is offline  
Old January 9, 2014, 03:19 PM   #35
2bfree
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 203
Remember to talk to every one you know, this will be a tough fight once it goes to the people of the state, King county is just to large and also anti. Also remember FTF is the only way to own an unregistered hand gun in this state.
http://www.examiner.com/article/bloo...trol-war-chest
2bfree is offline  
Old January 9, 2014, 06:07 PM   #36
David4516
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 29, 2003
Location: Yelm, WA
Posts: 940
This is going to the legislature and not the voters. The people of WA won't even get to vote on it. Please call your local reps that is the only thing that is going to help!

Edited to add:

I sent this message to my reps and state senator (3 politicians in total):

Quote:
Hello,

I am a concerned citizen living in Yelm. I have a couple of quick questions for you regarding I-594. I recently read this article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...e-legislature/

It states that this initiative will go directly to the state legislature if/when enough signatures are gathered:

"Washington allows citizens to file two types of initiatives: One puts a matter directly to a vote of the people, while the other puts an issue before the legislature..." "...I-594 is the second type."

So I am wondering if this is true, and if so, do you plan to vote for it?

My concern with 594 is that in order for it to be enforceable, I would think that you'd have to have a mandatory registration of all firearms in the state. I am a strong believer in individual rights, including the right to bear arms, and so this has me worried.

Thanks,

-David4516 (used my real name in the original letter)
Yelm, WA
Of the 3 that this was sent to (Randi Becker, Gary Alexander, and J.T. Wilcox) the only reply I got back was from Mr. Alexander, who apparently has just retired. Here is the reply:

Quote:
Thank you for your email. Representative Alexander retired from the Legislature at the end of the year and his replacement has not yet been appointed. It is true Washington has 2 different types of initiatives and I-594 will go directly to the Legislature. The Legislature has the option of acting on the initiative or sending it to the people for a vote.

Last edited by David4516; January 9, 2014 at 06:12 PM.
David4516 is offline  
Old January 9, 2014, 08:01 PM   #37
2bfree
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 203
The legislature did not pass this last year and at least it had an exclusion for CPL holders and LEO's. If the legislature does not pass it this year, it than goes to a vote of the people.

Last edited by 2bfree; January 9, 2014 at 08:16 PM.
2bfree is offline  
Old January 9, 2014, 08:13 PM   #38
J_McLeod
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 21, 2010
Location: Clarksville, TN
Posts: 1,394
Thanks for the heads up. I'm in the military, but own a home in WA and am still registered to vote. I'll write the representatives. If something like that passes I'm not coming back.
J_McLeod is offline  
Old January 10, 2014, 10:42 AM   #39
spottedpony
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 9, 2007
Posts: 38
My thinking on this, regardless of the state or agency, is that it's a 4th amendment violation, regarding unreasonable search/seizure.
My reasoning is that a person has to be suspected of something for a legitimate search to occur, and a background check is a search, of sorts. Thus unless there is a justifiable reason for search, its unreasonable, per the 4th.

Along similar lines, the 5th is supposed to protect us against abuse of government authority. To quote “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.
So, based on that, a firearm, for example, could not be confiscated without due process, which I take to mean at least a warrant issued by a judge.
spottedpony is offline  
Old January 17, 2014, 11:30 AM   #40
David4516
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 29, 2003
Location: Yelm, WA
Posts: 940
Well I just received a reply from Mr. Wilcox, here it is:

Quote:
Thank you for your email and for taking the time to share your concerns with me. I am a strong supporter of our 2nd Amendment rights and will do what I can to protect those rights. On January 14th, I swore an oath to "uphold the Constitution and laws of the United State of America, the Constitution and the laws of the state of Washington." I stand by that oath.

I was encouraged by this repsonse. I wrote back:

Quote:
Thank you for your reply. I am wondering if there is anything that I
can do as just a regular citizen to help, aside from just contacting
my representatives?

I hear that there will be a pro 2nd Amendment event this weekend at
the capital, and I will plan on going. But I'm not sure what to do
beyond that.

While I have some pretty strong opinions, I am not normally a
"politcally active" person. I am thinking it's time to be more active.
Waiting would be foolish, my fear is that once we lose our rights, we
won't be able to get them back.

Does anyone else from THR plan on showing up in Olympia this weekend?
David4516 is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 09:52 AM   #41
shootingthebreeze
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 30, 2010
Location: East Lansing MI
Posts: 385
http://www.nhregister.com/general-ne...ater-new-haven

If you read this article very carefully you will see a trend in the US with states, counties, cities, villages initiating firearm control measures due to Washington DC inaction.
Bloomberg, as an example, poured 30 million dollars into 594 (not I 594) so as you can see there is a quilt like firearm control tsunami going on in the US BECAUSE there is inaction at Washington DC.
My argument is this: the Second Amendment will be in danger IF a national addressing on the issue of firearm control IS NOT DONE. If flexibility on the part of firearm owners is not happening then see more quilt like laws springing up all over the US which will actually damage the Second Amendment more than if a national effort to study firearm control is not done.
I am a firearm owner and even have a CPL; my take on the subject is different than most here-and I look at the firearm situation in the US a little differently. You already have NY, IL, CA enacting at state level severe restrictions; that type of restriction creep is growing at the STATE level to a point I see in the future that firearm owners will have to have a manual to navigate through state, county city and village firearm laws throughout the US.
Only because at the national level inaction to address firearm control in a rational way is and will not be done.
For example, securing firearms is to me a priority for anyone. Accidental shooting deaths of children and stolen guns should not ever happen. It still does. The argument that "responsible gun owners lock their weapons" falls flat when I read about accidental shootings of children as an example. There should be zero incidents.
shootingthebreeze is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 06:21 PM   #42
2bfree
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 203
The Giffords will be at the state legislature on 1/28 to speak on behalf of 594 and expanded background checks.
2bfree is offline  
Old January 27, 2014, 06:39 PM   #43
David4516
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 29, 2003
Location: Yelm, WA
Posts: 940
shootingthebreeze,

I hear what you are saying but you are assuming that their goal is to make people safer. It is not, their real goal is an full ban on guns. They're just slowly moving that direction, one little step at a time. Do you honestly think that if there was a nation wide "safe storage" requirment that the anti-gun folks will stop all their efforts?

Please check out this comic, I think it very clearly shows why pro-gun folks are so rigid and unwilling to "compromise":

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/201...o-gun-control/

2bfree,

One thing I've never understood is why do people who live outside the state (Giffords, Blumberg, etc) have so much influance? In my opinion they shouldn't have any voice at the WA state legislature...
David4516 is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 07:24 PM   #44
steelerdude99
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 28, 2010
Location: Stafford County, VA
Posts: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by David4516 View Post
shootingthebreeze,

I hear what you are saying but you are assuming that their goal is to make people safer. It is not, their real goal is an full ban on guns. They're just slowly moving that direction, one little step at a time. Do you honestly think that if there was a nation wide "safe storage" requirement that the anti-gun folks will stop all their efforts?

...
Readers of "Washington State I-594 is Firearm Registration" thread,
This shootingthebreeze guy is "singing the same song" on other threads here on THR. Below is a link to a recent thread about New Hampshire proposed UBC law. Like David4516 says and what I would say as well: inching away at freedoms by anti-gun persons will never stop until all guns are outlawed. As such, I can't advocate giving an inch.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=741666

If like the U.K., the U.S. Government manages to achieve a total ban... then gun and non-gun crime skyrockets as crooks will never give up what they have and those who can't find guns will resort to knives and other weapons. Do you think there will be a "mea culpa"? I doubt it too.

Bottom line... shootingthebreeze may be gun owner, a concealed carry holder and retired military, BUT he (or she perhaps) does not speak for me.

chuck
steelerdude99 is offline  
Old January 28, 2014, 09:36 PM   #45
hartcreek
member
 
 
Join Date: January 19, 2014
Posts: 656
i am in the Yakima area and neither of the petitions seeem to have made it this way. I asked at a couple local gunshops today and just got blank looks.

Seattle fools have tried to get all kinds of city codes passed in the past. It appears that both iniatives already have enough Seattle signatures. The state attorney general now wonder what ig both of them pass then what as the one page iniative nullifies the other.

You can find links to the PDF files of each iniatitive and the site listed below.

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opinio...ve-washington/
hartcreek is offline  
Old February 9, 2014, 02:41 AM   #46
metalax
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 16, 2010
Posts: 25
Dupes

It seems no matter how many times these attempts to subvert our constitution
are voted down the big out of state money keeps coming back. Year after year they change a few words in the bill, drag another poor group of victims harmed by criminals and here we go again. They are like roaches they just don't seem to go away. I don't understand why, other than they are misinformed and being used like pawns to help the tyrannical government disarm American. JMHO
__________________
" For every moment of truth, there's confusion in life"
Ronnie James Dio
metalax is offline  
Old February 11, 2014, 07:35 PM   #47
Wyatt
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 8, 2005
Location: Palmer, AK
Posts: 28
Sadly, I think the changing face of WA voters is very similar to CO. If this vote goes to the people, I think I-594 passes!
Wyatt is offline  
Old February 20, 2014, 05:31 PM   #48
col_temp
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 14, 2012
Location: Seattle Metro Area, WA
Posts: 236
Quote:
Sadly, I think the changing face of WA voters is very similar to CO. If this vote goes to the people, I think I-594 passes!
A Lot of that depends on King County the liberal basket case of WA state.
Also, wouldn't it be interesting to see the results if both 594 and 591 pass. 591 basically invalidates 594!

The biggest advantage is if this goes to the ballot (Likely).
Maybe we will finally get the rest of the more conservative parts of the state to actually vote, thus getting rid of more of the crazy Democrats in the various legislative bodies.
__________________
Paris
No one can ever be too prepared.
"A prudent man sees evil and hides himself, The naive proceed and pay the penalty." Prov. 27:12
col_temp is offline  
Old April 20, 2014, 02:22 PM   #49
2bfree
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 203
Got my first pro 594 phone call Friday, started out telling me why I should support it, predictably he left a lot out. In the end he asked if I would support them. When I said no he asked why ? When I started to explain it to him he just hung up. It has started, and vote is not till November !
2bfree is offline  
Old April 21, 2014, 12:23 PM   #50
georgejeanlouis
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 19, 2014
Posts: 1
As a society we are responsible for keeping guns out of the hands of criminals ...

click through the next site

Last edited by georgejeanlouis; April 22, 2014 at 09:17 AM.
georgejeanlouis is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.