Washington state residents

You can watch the Senate hearing live here. Don't have anything hot or liquid in your mouth or hand, though. You may experience an overwhelming urge to throw them at the screen when Senator Kline speaks. :banghead:

http://www.tvw.org/media/LiveTemplates/LivePlayer.cfm?evid=2010010151&bhcp=1

Thanks for the link crazed!

Showing up to support gun ownership is great but I think maybe leaving the camouflage at home when heading to a Senate hearing would be a good idea. Not everyone who enjoys owning firearms looks like they just crawled out of the woods and it certainly doesn't help public perception.

Just my .02

I have been tracking this bill very closely since the sponsors stated they were going to introduce it back in Dec. 2009. I realize it's still in committee, a first step in the WA legislative process. However, I believe it is important that we show strong support for the preservation of our 2A rights.

To anyone that attended the hearing, can you give us WA residents and highroad members an idea of how the hearing went?

I did not attend, but this is what was posted by those that watched it at opencarry.org (the most important info is at the end!):

Apparantly Senetor Kline was the chairperson on the hearing on his own bill and he initially was only going to allow supporters to speak at the hearing and nothing from the dissenting side.

Anyone else's blood boiling at Sen Kline!

Yay Pam Roach!

For anyone who was there, were the only people in favor of the bill the ones Kline invited to testify?

Simply incredible that they didn't let Dave Workman speak!

Maybe I am wrong here, but if the police chief of Bellevue was there as a private citizen she should have left her uniform at home. I know as a member of the military, I would never wear my uniform to a function like that where I was presenting my personal views. You guys in Bellevue need to call her out on that in the paper, IMO.

I now realize what a tool Kline really is. You guys have very many of those on that side of the mountains?

bob

Kline stacked the deck in for testimony, then interjected all kinds of personal (and often erroneous) bias from his bully pulpit. Why the hell should a committee chair be allowed to chair the hearing for his own bill? He should have had to defer to the co-chair. And he agreed to allow a majority of the testimony to come from the anti-bill folks after Sen. Roach made the point about the accepted practice, but then only allowed equal testimonials. ***??!!

Some notes I made while watching:
Adam Kline’s argument:
I went to a range and saw how extraordinarily safe you responsible gun owners are. Firearms are like an arms race, if criminals get them then you want them. Why do we want these in commerce then?
<Clearly he doesn’t get the why.>

Sullivan’s mother:
“We have laws that protect our children from narcotics and alcohol and when they can drive and when they can vote and I would like to see some laws protecting our children from assault weapons. Because they are impulsive, and it was impulsive when the person killed my son. I would like to keep our children safe and keep them out of our most vulnerable young people.” Kline: do you know the model of the gun used to kill your son. Sullivan’s mom: “No, I don’t”
<So, she doesn’t know if an assault weapon was even used! >.< >

NRA representative:
… violates the 4th amendment…

Kline:
There would be an amendment taking that portion out

NRA:
Arguably this bill is trying to find a degree of lethality. Pistol grips have nothing to do with lethality. … This bill will sow confusion, not control.

Kline:
Legal discussion: DC vs heller. Total ban rightfully unconstitutional. Quoting from Heller: like most rights, the rights secured by the 2nd amendment are not unlimited. … [you cannot carry anything].. . Nothing in our opinion should be used to cast doubt on felons.. blah blah blah. Isn’t that a fairly clear and concise validation of laws like this?

<No, Kline, it’s not>
NRA response:

Kline: This is an invitation by the US Supreme court to pass reasonable restrictions…
<No, Kline, it’s not>


“Merton Cooper: If you hold it like this *vertical fist*, you’re a felon. If you hold it like this *angled fist*, you’re legal....
And then the government is telling you how loud noises are bad for your hearing. Yet they don’t let me put a muffler on my firearm. They make me put one on my car!"

If you were Kline, and were only going to allow one more person to speak against your bill, who would you choose? Dave Workman, or Merton Cooper?

There is no way that Kline was going to let Dave speak.

AND THE IMPORTANT PART:

So far, after talking with everyone on the committee (their staff members), I have a tentative 3 yea's, and 5 nay's on this bill. It hasn't been voted on yet, but when it does, this is what I'm expecting.

2 (D)s and 3 (R)s are voting nay. A simple majority is needed to pass it, and it won't pass according to the staff members of the 5 I spoke with.

Erik.

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/37163-2.html

Thanks for posting the summary of the hearing.

I find it puzzling why the sponsor(s) of the bill feel the need to limit discussion and free exchange of ideas on the legislation if their bill has so much merit.

Does anyone know when the vote will take place?

To back up what NavyLT said regarding which way we expect the Senate Judiciary committee members to vote, I called all 8 offices on Monday and got 4 promises to oppose it, 2 answering machines and 2 "yeah whatevers" (Kline and Kohl-Welles).

I'm cautiously optimistic that rational thinking will actually win over in this situation.

And Pam Roach does indeed deserve a great deal of praise and respect for advocating for common sense analysis of the situation as well as our rights.

Who is on the committee & which ones are pro or con?

Kline is showboating. he knows the make up of the Washington public. Good to keep up the pressure, though.

Many legislators dismiss form letters and emails and at most keep a score of such just to decide if they should pay attention to any particular issue. If you want your letter to actually be read by anyone above a secretary position, hand deliver it or fax it in and include some handwritten comments so the aide that picks up the document will see that it is not a form letter. Being concise is also a plus. I have done some lobbying in DC (with professional lobbyist escorts since we were just another company with a few jobs dependent on free trade), and that was the professional recommendation. Votes and jobs is what attracts a legislator's attention.

Most Washington legislators outside of Seattle & Tacoma know that the voters are pro-Second Amendment, but it is good to remind them all.

Senator Pam Roach's blog says there were not enough votes to move the bill out of committee. It's dead. Now we should focus on the House Bills.

HB 2477 would hold a person responsible if they sell a gun at a gun show to someone who would not have passed a NICS background check, and who subsequently uses that gun in a crime, especially if someone is injured or killed.

HB 2264 also deals with gun shows, and requires every transaction to go through a licensed dealer.