Washington State I-594 is Firearm Registration

[silicosys4]

They've spent $25,000 to help you and you're whining that you're going to cancel your membership? I'm sorry but the NRA is not a big brother that will solve all your problems. Members of each state need to be taking the bull by the horns.
The NRA does a lot on the national level as well as state but they can't be involved in every issue. The fact that you got some help from them already is something to be thankful for.

Good luck to all of you.

All fine and good...unless you live in Washington and have watched MUCH more money being spent elsewhere to protect other people's rights, and then watch the NRA pretty much ignore the same threats to yours that they made a huge effort against for others.

$25,000 is an insult when I guarantee there are much higher amounts than that in membership dues coming out of Washington state.

You know what? There is probably more coming out of my freakin county alone.

If Washington I-594 were getting much more publicity nationally, the NRA would be much more involved, I guarantee it

I am not a member so I can watch the NRA use my dues to fight for OTHER people's rights in OTHER places, then COMPLETELY drop the ball when the pooh hits the fan in my state.

Sorely dissapointed in the lack of NRA support in Washington. Right now I am having to really keep a calm head when I think about renewing my membership and remember the fight that the NRA has given nationally
because they sure aren't doing squat where it actually impacts me.
emailing them now to complain

 

[Bobson]

If 594 passes, couldn't we have it forcibly repealed (or whatever the correct term for that is) on the grounds that it openly violates the Firearm Owner Protection Act of 1986 (which made it a federal crime for either state or federal government to maintain a firearm registry)?

 

[OilyPablo]

It could be challenged on various fronts. Including violations of the initiative process laws which includes statutes that limit the topics of individual initiatives. The fact that the initiative contains wrong information about sales vs. use tax for example.

 

[bikemutt]

Wasn't the 10 day waiting period just ruled unconstitutional in California? Goodness knows if CA says any restriction on 2A rights is unconstitutional, it could happen here.

 

[Ryanxia]

silicosys4 - I understand your frustration, but do you understand that the NRA and the NRA-ILA are basically two separate organizations? To the best of my knowledge regular membership dues do not go towards the ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) which was created to combat Bills like I-594. That's why I try to encourage people to donate to the NRA-ILA so we have more money to work with.

Did some digging. This is from an old letter.

Thank you for contacting NRA-ILA.

Due to various laws, the NRA-ILA is a separate entity and it does not receive any funding from normal membership dues. The NRA-ILA's funding comes from separate member donations specifically contributed to support our lobbying and political activities.

Normal member dues support training, education, shooting sports activities and the cost of the magazine.

Again, thank you for your inquiry and please do not hesitate to share any of your thoughts or concerns in the future.

Sincerely,
Kyle C
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division

 

[bikemutt]

Looks as if the NRA has sent in more than the paltry $25k mentioned earlier: http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politicsnorthwest/2014/09/10/nra-sends-more-money-to-fight-i-594/?syndication=rss

 

[Ryanxia]

FTA bikemutt linked:

But today, the state’s disclosure site shows donations that bring the NRA’s contributions to nearly $200,000. The NRA donated $100,000 on Aug. 18, another $31,500 on Aug. 27, and $35,000 on Aug. 7.

Sweet.

 

[OilyPablo]

I feel like finally people are starting to realize the insidious nature of this poorly written initiative. I'm really reaching. ...stretching. ..for me to have convinced over 20 people AND have TWO bumper stickers on my car is way outside my typical comfort zone. Oddly it feels good. Keep up the good fight! !

 

[David4516]

I honestly think 594 is going to pass, by a landslide.

People hear "background checks" and will want to vote "yes" without looking at the fine print.

I sure hope I'm wrong...

I am trying to tell people that if this passes I can't take them to the range to shoot with me, because if I let them shoot my guns we'll both become felons.

Also I saw this article about 594 today, thought I'd share:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...re-May-Turn-Shooters-at-Ranges-Into-Criminals

 

[David4516]

Also I'd like to put "no on I594" signs in my yard and bumper stickers on my car. But if I do that I might as well put up a sign that reads "wait until I leave for work and then steal all my guns". How can I publicly show opposition for this without inviting burglars into my home?

 

[OilyPablo]

Well everyone can help. Convince those people to vote no. No on I 594.

 

[OilyPablo]

Also I'd like to put "no on I594" signs in my yard and bumper stickers on my car. But if I do that I might as well put up a sign that reads "wait until I leave for work and then steal all my guns". How can I publicly show opposition for this without inviting burglars into my home?

Put the signs on the road.

 

[bikemutt]

Also I'd like to put "no on I594" signs in my yard and bumper stickers on my car. But if I do that I might as well put up a sign that reads "wait until I leave for work and then steal all my guns". How can I publicly show opposition for this without inviting burglars into my home?

Put them in any anti-gun neighbor's yard?

Just kidding...

 

[OilyPablo]

I figure I will risk it for 7 weeks. We ALL need to move out of our comfort zones.

http://seattleguns.net/showthread.p...N-RAFFLE!-To-benefit-pro-591-anti-594-efforts

 

[Ryanxia]

I figure I will risk it for 7 weeks. We ALL need to move out of our comfort zones.

http://seattleguns.net/showthread.p...N-RAFFLE!-To-benefit-pro-591-anti-594-efforts

Your link doesn't work for non members of that site.

 

[OilyPablo]

Understood. Meant for local guys. Easy to join the site though.

SGN/WaGuns GUN RAFFLE! -- To benefit pro-591, anti-594 efforts

In an effort to further the fight to keep our rights, some VERY generous individuals have donated firearms and ammo to support the cause!


This is a joint SGN-WaGuns raffle; we will be selling raising money on both sites. We're all in this anti-594 fight together!

Here's how this will work:

- You can buy one chance (i.e., one "ticket") to win for $5. You can buy as many chances as you like.
- The raffle will end at 9:00 p.m. on Monday, September 29th. At that time, we will draw as many names as there are prizes (currently seven). The first name drawn will have his choice of prize; the second name will get second choice, and so on until all are spoken for.
- The winners of firearms win the right to buy the selected firearm for $10. The firearm is not free; it will cost the winner $10. (This is for legal reasons.) Note that the non-firearm prizes do not require a $10 purchase price.

100% of all money raised (less any PayPal or credit card fees, and not including the $10 purchase price of each gun) will be passed along; 50% will be given to Protect Our Gun Rights (POGR) (committed to passing I591) and 50% will be given to WeCARE (committed to defeating I594).

http://www.594badlaw.com/

http://wagunrights.org/

 

[Bobson]

I honestly think 594 is going to pass, by a landslide.

People hear "background checks" and will want to vote "yes" without looking at the fine print.

Not surprising, given this is what the ballot will read:

Initiative Measure No. 594 concerns background checks for firearm sales and transfers.

This measure would apply the currently used criminal and public safety background checks by licensed dealers to all firearm sales and transfers, including gun show and online sales, with specific exceptions

Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]

How is that legal? Anyone familiar with the bill knows this is horrendously misleading. I understand a bill can't have its full text there on the ballot, but if a bill serves to change several different things, who gets to say which of those are represented on the ballot? I mean... that's BS. It would be like a history book detailing Obama's presidency by informing the reader that he's black, and leaving it at that.

 

[OilyPablo]

If you have a stomach for this sort of thing:

http://www.katu.com/politics/Town-Hall-Special-Guns-in-America-274991541.html?tab=video&c=y

Local guys: I have some signs and stickers from the show today. If you are anywhere near Duvall, shoot me a PM/email.

 

[steelerdude99]

Potential Ballot text of I-594​

How is that legal? Anyone familiar with the bill knows this is horrendously misleading. I understand a bill can't have its full text there on the ballot, but if a bill serves to change several different things, who gets to say which of those are represented on the ballot? I mean... that's BS. It would be like a history book detailing Obama's presidency by informing the reader that he's black, and leaving it at that.

It's a slick system ain't it? It's like a contract where the entire text is omitted, but still legally binding. Another bad part of I-594 is that keeps the gun grabber's "hands clean" politically. They can potentially get what they want and not even have to pay at re-election time like a few in Colorado did. After all the people spoke and got what they wanted.

If anyone ever doubted they true intent of I-594, see page 10 of the bill where if you inherited a firearm, you have 60 days to get it registered.

(g) A person who (i) acquired a firearm other than a pistol by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of the firearm or (ii) acquired a pistol by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of the pistol within the preceding sixty days. At the end of the sixty-day period, the person must either have lawfully transferred the pistol or must have contacted the department of licensing to notify the department that he or she has possession of the pistol and intends to retain possession of the pistol, in compliance with all federal and state laws.

I don't live in WA state; I just see the potential for such a bad law to be introduced elsewhere. I-594 would be the model for a law along with "a path to enactment" for other states to get gun laws on the books without political fallout. Then in a few years after the transfers have been going on for a while and they know who has what (i.e the registry grows), they can go after persons who cannot prove that they did not improperly transfer (i.e. no transfer entry). Maybe in ten or so years, WA can pass a law saying that if you did not transfer it via I-594 you may register your firearms to avoid being improperly prosecuted for something you owned prior to I-594.

It's not about if someone may own or have access to firearms; it's about keeping track of each and every firearm. Then after catching those who violate I-594 twice (2nd offense is a felony), make them prohibited persons which will reduce the total number of firearms in the state.

chuck

PS: I did not see it anywhere in the I-594 text, maybe Bill Gates with his I-594 gift sees the potential for the added computer resources on a system that will "have to" run on Windows servers.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

Hey, I haven't read the details of who can loan what to whom, but is it possible this could increase the number of firearms in Washington? If a person cannot borrow a firearm, s/he will have to buy one instead?

And what about shopping for a firearm? If you are trying to decide between 6 firearms can you borrow firearms for trial or do you need to buy all six to try them out?

Might be fun to ask pro I-594 people whether they want to encourage an increase in firearms and mention this question.

 

[Ryanxia]

Hey, I haven't read the details of who can loan what to whom, but is it possible this could increase the number of firearms in Washington? If a person cannot borrow a firearm, s/he will have to buy one instead?

And what about shopping for a firearm? If you are trying to decide between 6 firearms can you borrow firearms for trial or do you need to buy all six to try them out?

Might be fun to ask pro I-594 people whether they want to encourage an increase in firearms and mention this question.

It's an interesting thought but the consequences from this Bill passing far outweigh any potential uptick in sales.

 

[OilyPablo]

No doubt there will be changes in behavior. Could be some uptick in New sales. People eschewing used guns to avoid the hassle of private sale used guns. Much more consignment of used guns may negate that.

What worries me is the initiative is so poorly written even if an otherwise law abiding citizen tries to comply they run afoul. Then there are the unintended consequences. Even the best laws can have one or two. This thing is such a mess we could be creating a whole new criminal class from lawful people. It's the bad. And the drooling gun haters just say they won't enforce this or that part or the first offense part will let you off the hook if there was no malicious intent. But they keep your gun.

 

[bikemutt]

One thing I thought of that may have I-594 sponsors running for the exit door is hiring our State's Initiative Writer-in-Chief, Tim Eyman, to craft a new state Income Tax on Billionaires for the next go round. I have a feeling it would be very popular among the electorate.

 

[hso]

WRT attacking 594 and addressing the UBC provision, take the approach that criminals don't acquire firearms from sources that a UBC would impact anyway. UBC is a red herring or, more accurately, a Trojan Horse to wrap a palatable lie around the more draconian measures.

I advise listing the most draconian elements that are hidden from the public and using those as the points to focus on. When UBC is brought up, point out that nationally it has been shown that UBC serves no constructive purpose and that it is only used to candy coat the trash that politicians who fear monger to advance their careers stick in this sort of legislation. We can point to the continuously falling violent crime rates and murder rates in the absence of UBC as reason enough to not cling to that false hope and take on the poor quality of the other snakes in the box.

 

[David4516]

Assuming that 594 does pass, will it affect the way you shop for guns, and if so, how?

For example, can I even pick up a gun at a gunshow to see if it fits my hand? Or would that be considered a "transfer"? Do you have to buy a gun before you can even touch it? I might be reading this thing wrong but I suspect that if it passes this will be the case.

What about ranges that "rent" guns? I assume that will be outlawed? Or will the range have to "sell" you the gun, and then "buy" it back for that to work?

Another example: Say I take a new person to the range, maybe they've never shot before and don't even know IF they want to buy a gun, so I'll let them try some of mine first to get a feel for it (I've done this before a few times). Can I hand them my gun to try? Or will this be illegal even though they're going to pass it back to me in 2 minutes anyway?

I know it's unlikely that a LEO will be standing there at the range just waiting for this to happen so they can bust me, but still, I don't think most people will take that risk, they'll err on the side of caution.

Maybe I'm being way too pessimistic but I have this fear that if I-594 becomes law it will KILL recreational shooting in WA state...