Revived gun-control bill approved 97-0 in state House..BILL PASSED

[Elkaholic daWg]

Definitely don't like this law.  Years ago when I was going through a divorce I was visiting my parents out of State and my wife's attorney convinced her to file a restraining order on me, even though there was no valid reason.  It was just to be vindictive and keep me from coming back to my own home when I returned.  She even allowed the Sheriff's Dept. to confiscate all of my firearms while I was gone.  I had to go to court just to get my firearms returned!  Anyone can file a restraining order in this State and you don't have to prove a thing in order to get it!

 
This type abuse of process likely happens more often than we are aware of.  This law is likely to result in wrongly confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens due to the frivolous, vindictive, or unwarranted filing of a restraining orders.  What judge is going to take a chance in any of these types of cases?  How will the definition of "credible threat" be applied equally and fairly?  This may result in many situations of guilty until proven innocent.  There may be legitimate cases in which there is a "credible threat"; however, the likely abuse of the restraining order process needs to be addressed.  There do not appear to be any consequences for filing frivolous, vindictive, or unwarranted restraining orders.  If there are serious consequences for abusing the restraining order process, then the law may not be so ominous.  The reaction to an unwarranted restraining order may end up being like suspending a second grader from school because he chewed a pop-tart into a shape resembling a gun (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/anne-arundel-second-grader-suspended-for-chewing-his-pastry-into-the-shape-of-a-gun/2013/03/04/44c4bbcc-84c4-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html).  This type of law should not be allowed to pass without having very strong restrictions placed on being able to file restraining orders and very serious consequences in place for filing unwarranted restraining orders.

All should take a very close look at this bill and consider the possible abuses and unintended consequences:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1840

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2013-14/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1840-S.E.pdf

 :yeah:LOADS of abuse potential!!!!

[blackdog]

Legalizing Short barreled rifles just passed the Senate 47 to nothing.

[ghosthunter]

So I guess, If you think your gal is going south, stash your guns before it happens.

[bigtex]

So I guess, If you think your gal is going south, stash your guns before it happens.

And then hope to god you don't get caught with your gun because then you'll be charged with a felony....

The same offense used for charging felons in possession of a gun will be used for those violating this law....

[huntrights]

 
This law may be far too easy to abuse.  Frivolous/vindictive/unwarranted no-contact orders of this type do happen.  The accused may fall into a situation of guilty until they can prove they are not a "credible threat".  How is “credible threat” determined?  Is that determination equally applied and fair?  This law may result in wrongly confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens and wreaking havoc in their lives due to abuse and/or misapplication of these types of no-contact orders.  The no-contact, protection, and restraining order system should be infallible before ever considering tying it to a law such as this.  This law may cast a net so big it will impose unjustified consequences on many innocent people.  This law appears to be another example of the demonization of firearms and another method of firearm confiscation.


It's very fast and easy to have your voice heard on any proposed legislation.

Go to the legislative web site associated with the proposed bill:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1840

Take a few minutes to scan through the bill:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2013-14/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1840-S.E.pdf

Contact your representatives by clicking on the "Comment on this bill" button.  You can write up to 1,000 characters; that's only 10 to 12 lines so you have to keep it short and to the point.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill/1840


"We the People" must be willing to get engaged in the political process or we will most definitely continue to lose our rights and freedoms.  Don't just complain about these issues; get involved and make your voices heard.  Your individual voice really does make a difference.

The excuse of not having the time is gone; it only takes a few minutes to make a difference.  Take action and get others to do the same.

[Elkaholic daWg]

 Sent senator Pearson a message stating just about that huntrights

[WoodlandShooter]

The NRA was neutral not supportive.

They had to be due to their previous statements,  this is a "GOTCHA!" bill.


So be careful dating crazy chicks 

LMFAO!!!

Silence  =  Agreement

[DOUBLELUNG]

No. No. No. 

Is there really no recourse already in law for a credible threat?

[bigtex]

The bill will have it's Senate hearing on 2/26 in front of the Senate Law & Justice Committee.

[Fl0und3rz]

No. No. No. 

Is there really no recourse already in law for a credible threat?

There is, but the incredible threats (the vindictive opportunistic allegations) get swept up with it. 

Nobody wants to be the judge that says, "this does not appear credible," just to have the case end up with a dead spouse from an estranged lover.   So the default, in practice, is to err on the side of safety, 2A, 4A, and 5A rights be damned.  This is ripe for abuse from vindictive spouses and shady attorneys.

This appears, at least from my cursory reading, to restore a little balance by requiring notice and opportunity to be heard in the face of allegations that could result in your 2A rights being jeopardized.

[Special T]

Of course this provides easy opportunity for abuse. How many women are brought up on charges for falsely accusing men of rape whan it can be proven? Answer? Not very often.

I tell EVERY young man i meet that is dating. Be carful who you live with or marry. There is WAY more at stake than how good looking she is, or how good a job she does at warming you up at night. 

[PNW_Hunter]

Gone to be tough to get opposition to this bill. Last year the bill passed 61-37. The amendments were made this year and the entire House voted in favor, very rarely do ALL legislators (in this case House members) vote in favor of any gun bill. And finally you have the NRA in favor of a gun control legislation, that in itself says something.

I must have missed that, but can someone please post a link or something to where the NRA expressed support of this bill?

Thanks

[bigtex]

Gone to be tough to get opposition to this bill. Last year the bill passed 61-37. The amendments were made this year and the entire House voted in favor, very rarely do ALL legislators (in this case House members) vote in favor of any gun bill. And finally you have the NRA in favor of a gun control legislation, that in itself says something.

I must have missed that, but can someone please post a link or something to where the NRA expressed support of this bill?

Thanks

I have been informed that the NRA was in support/behind the amendment to the bill, but overall the NRA is neutral/has no opinion on the bill.

[CAMPMEAT]

Our corrupt gubmint can't do anything right, ever. We don't need another assnine bill for the feel goods out there.............

[bigtex]

The bill passed out of the Senate Law and Justice Committee today with a unanimous vote. The members of the committee are Senators Padden, O'Ban, Kline, Darneille, Pearson, Pedersen, and Roach. The bill now goes on to a full Senate vote then on to the Governor for signing.