collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Initiatives 594 and 591  (Read 66281 times)

Online Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21761
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #135 on: September 19, 2014, 03:49:25 PM »
While I-591 is a good initiative which we hope passes, our full resources are going into defeating I-594.
They're really missing the boat. Very disappointing.

https://washingtonarmscollectors.org/2014/09/vote-for-i591/

A vote for I591 is critical. Recent public polling reveals that about 73% of Washington voters will vote “yes” on 594.
...

Initiative 591 is our only opportunity to stop 594 from becoming law in Washington
Early in the year polling indicated that 591 was also likely to pass, but more recent data shows 591 losing ground. It is now possible that 591 will not receive the votes necessary to become law. The millions of dollars spent by 594 supporters have had in impact. The superficial presentation by our major media has served to promote the idea that 594 is the better of the two initiatives.
 
I’ll put it bluntly—our only hope at this point is the passage of 591. If both 591 and 594 pass then two voter-approved initiatives with completely incompatible legal requirements have been made law. 591 mandates that, “It is unlawful for any government agency to require background checks on the recipient of a firearm unless a uniform national standard is required.” This 591 provision would prohibit the private transfer requirements within 594 from becoming law because they are not part of any current Federal or national standard. 591 has the potential to stop 594 in its tracks.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline huntrights

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 1701
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #136 on: September 19, 2014, 06:31:22 PM »

We need the grassroots effort to defeat I-594 and to pass I-591. 
Educate the public. 
Make sure ALL people you know are registered to VOTE and that they

VOTE YES on I-591 (Protect Our Gun Rights)

and

VOTE NO on I-594 (the ANTI-GUN Initiative)


Offline Greenhorn

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2012
  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Bickleton
  • Groups: NRA
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #137 on: September 19, 2014, 09:01:56 PM »
I have been letting all of my Facebook friends know the importance of voting no on 594 every chance I get.   I changed my profile picture to no on 594 and also reply to anyone that posts something positive about it.   Usually I finish by asking them that if they are considering voting for it to read the 18 pages of rights that they are allowing the rich oligarchs of Seattle and New York to buy with their money.   If there is anyone on this forum that is considering voting for it I think you are disgusting and ignorant at the very minimum.  Vote NO I-594 and yes I-591.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Offline Fl0und3rz

  • Forum Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 51553
  • Location: E. WA
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #138 on: September 25, 2014, 12:13:57 PM »
GOA email alert on I-594

Quote
NY Billionaire Wants to Buy out the Second Amendment in WA State
-- I-594 would result in 1 out of 16 gun buyers being illegitimately denied

Former Mayor Michael “Big Gulp” Bloomberg is trying to buy another state -- and this time the state is Washington. 

The Bloomberg-backed proposal is I-594.  This initiative will be voted on in the November election, and it’s 18 pages long.  Eighteen pages!

So the only thing most Washingtonians will know about it is the lies Bloomberg is paying to spew over the airwaves.

Gun background checks:  A repeated record of failure

Bloomberg claims that universal background checks -- and the inevitable universal gun registries -- will make Americans safer.

But Jared Loughner (who shot Gabrielle Giffords) passed a background check. James Holmes (the Aurora shooter) passed a background check.  Ditto, Elliot Rodger in Santa Barbara and Naveed Afzal Haq in Seattle.  Adam Lanza in Newtown stole his guns from his mom, who passed lots of background checks.

This, incidentally, even though the Brady Law was sold in the early 90’s as “the gun control which would stop crime and end the call for more gun control.”

The reality is that background checks are more of a burden to law-abiding citizens, than to criminals.  Consider that more than 175,000 military veterans have been denied firearms because of PTSD-related symptoms.

And researcher John Lott has reported that roughly 95% of gun buyers who are initially denied by the FBI are actually “false positives.”  It’s no wonder then that, as reported by the Department of Justice in 2012, the DOJ only prosecuted 44 criminals for illegally attempting to purchase a firearm -- and only 13 were convicted!

Background checks have utterly failed to take criminals off the street, which is the ONLY way to keep guns out of their hands.

But then again, the name of the game isn’t safety. It’s exploiting the victims of horrible tragedies in order to score political gain.

Detroit and Baltimore have background checks, gun bans and gun registries -- and yet both cities have murder rates that are amongst the highest in the nation.
   
But, if Bloomberg’s aim is not public safety, it’s making gun ownership such a trap-laden labyrinth that people throw up their hands and give up their guns.

After all, if Bloomberg has his way, one in sixteen law-abiding Washingtonians will be illegitimately banned from owning guns -- for no justifiable reason.

I-594 will create an illegitimate gun ban for 1 in 16 gun buyers

The dirty little secret of the Brady system is that 6.2% of law-abiding gun purchasers -- or one out of sixteen -- are illegally prevented from buying firearms.

This is, in large part, because the Brady InstantCheck system seldom indicates that a purchaser is a “prohibited person.” But it frequently provides a non-committal “yellow light” which never changes to green or red -- normally because the person’s name is similar to someone else’s.

Most gun dealers will not sell a gun subject to a “yellow light,” even if the law allows them to after three, ten, or sixty days.

And, while the FBI is legally required to correct these errors, more often than not, it simply tells the aggrieved party to “sue us” if unhappy with the erroneously imposed gun ban. Most people just give up -- or they simply buy a gun from a private individual.

But under Bloomberg’s initiative, private citizens buying from other private citizens will now have a one out of sixteen chance of being subject to an erroneous lifetime gun ban.

What if one out of sixteen lawful voters was illegally turned away from the polls?  What if one out of sixteen innocent men was illegally sent to prison?  What if one out of sixteen newspapers was shut down?  None of these would be acceptable to anti-gun zealots who, with relish, deny the right of legitimate gun purchasers to exercise their Second Amendment rights one out of every sixteen times.

GET THE REST OF THE STORY.  These problems with I-594 are just the tip of the iceberg. You can read GOA’s entire Fact Sheet on I-594 -- and get all of the sources and footnotes -- at http://gunowners.org/fact9252014.htm

ACTION: Send this alert to everyone you know. Ask them to re-send it to everyone they know. Let every gun owner in Washington State -- or friend of a gun owner -- know that the Bloomberg initiative (I-594) must be defeated

Offline andytoshif

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 27
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #139 on: September 25, 2014, 04:03:07 PM »
So sorry to see this happening. I left my home in the 509 in 2011 for a job in Maryland, where I now have front row seats for one of the biggest anti-2A shows in the nation.

It isn't about having a place in the conversation and negotiating a common sense arrangement. That would mean that the antis don't have disarmament as a long term goal and that they follow statistics and reason.

They want to take our guns, and they are content to slow walk laws, one at a time, till the Second Amendment is a punch line. They do that with lies and emotional manipulation--not statistics and reason.

Folks, it's about two things: Winning at the ballot box and uniformly supporting effective messaging.

Democrats can't win or WA could end up like Maryland, where Dems cram idiotic bills through that make less sense than I-594.

As far as messaging, the NRA is failing--terribly--and needs to use its clout or we will continue to lose the public's support.

Anyhow, keep fighting this law--it all starts with one.

Offline timberfaller

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2014
  • Posts: 4180
  • Location: East Wenatchee
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #140 on: September 30, 2014, 11:42:51 AM »
The commercial with the two clown prosecutors has Bownell's logo being used!  I just email them to find out if they knew one of their trademarks are being used in a anti gun campaign.

It is quite the propaganda piece!  anything requiring a FFL HAS to be shipped to a FFL holder.  There are a few exceptions but only involving "In-state sales".

Will post what ever answer I get.

Others might want to do the same.
The only good tree, is a stump!

Offline huntnphool

  • Chance favors the prepared mind!
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+15)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Posts: 32901
  • Location: Pacific NorthWest
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #141 on: September 30, 2014, 11:48:10 AM »
The commercial with the two clown prosecutors has Bownell's logo being used!  I just email them to find out if they knew one of their trademarks are being used in a anti gun campaign.

It is quite the propaganda piece!  anything requiring a FFL HAS to be shipped to a FFL holder.  There are a few exceptions but only involving "In-state sales".

Will post what ever answer I get.

Others might want to do the same.

Do you mean Brownells?
The things that come to those who wait, may be the things left by those who got there first!

Offline DP

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Bellevue
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #142 on: September 30, 2014, 12:10:39 PM »
It sounds like under this law if you were in possession of a gun that wasn't yours, for whatever reason, you would simply have to tell the authorities that it IS your gun, if questioned. How could they prove it was not?

My dad gives me guns all the time, either to clean, install a scope, or sight in. If asked, I would lie. Yes, lie, and say the gun is mine. It's really nobody's business anyway.

My feeling is the anti's bit off more than they can chew with this one. It's simply too extreme. No reasonable person will vote for it.

Unfortunately, plenty of unreasonable people qualify for a ballot(s).

Offline birddogdad

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Posts: 1999
  • Location: WA
  • Groups: LMAC, NRA
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #143 on: September 30, 2014, 12:30:11 PM »
It sounds like under this law if you were in possession of a gun that wasn't yours, for whatever reason, you would simply have to tell the authorities that it IS your gun, if questioned. How could they prove it was not?

My dad gives me guns all the time, either to clean, install a scope, or sight in. If asked, I would lie. Yes, lie, and say the gun is mine. It's really nobody's business anyway.

My feeling is the anti's bit off more than they can chew with this one. It's simply too extreme. No reasonable person will vote for it.

Unfortunately, plenty of unreasonable people qualify for a ballot(s).

This is what is NOT being published and IS  one hidden problem with this BS agenda.
USN retired
1981-2011

Offline bigbds61

  • Big4x7bull
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 91
  • Location: Kennewick
  • First and only bobcat so far
  • Groups: NRA, RMEF, Pheasants Forever
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #144 on: September 30, 2014, 01:17:24 PM »
VOTE NO on both I-594 AND I-591.  I-591 will open the door for the UN to come in via a National Standard and place controls that violate the 2nd Amendment.  Please do not be fooled.  No new laws.  Leave the 2nd Amendment alone.  Period.
NRA Life Member, NAHC Life Member, Pheasants Forever, Washington State Hunters Safety Instructor, NRA Certified Rifle and Shotgun Instructor and RSO

Offline pianoman9701

  • Mushroom Man
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 44853
  • Location: Vancouver USA
  • WWC, NRA Life, WFW, NAGR, RMEF, WSB, NMLS #2014743
    • www.facebook.com/johnwallacemortgage
    • John Wallace Mortgage
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #145 on: September 30, 2014, 04:09:43 PM »
Our background checks are done through the federal government database. We are currently being held to the federal standard. not only that, but the Senate must vote on new standards. That gives each state equal representation, as opposed to the House, which goes by population. The best chance we have for keeping our rights in WA, as liberal as it is, is to be bound to the national standard. Voting No on I-591 is not a smart idea.
"Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens based on the actions of criminals and madmen will have no positive effect on the future acts of criminals and madmen. It will only serve to reduce individual rights and the very security of our republic." - Pianoman https://linktr.ee/johnlwallace https://valoaneducator.tv/johnwallace-2014743

Offline Greenhorn

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2012
  • Posts: 1134
  • Location: Bickleton
  • Groups: NRA
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #146 on: September 30, 2014, 07:58:45 PM »
 :yeah:
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Offline huntrights

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 1701
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #147 on: September 30, 2014, 09:53:19 PM »
VOTE NO on both I-594 AND I-591.  I-591 will open the door for the UN to come in via a National Standard and place controls that violate the 2nd Amendment.  Please do not be fooled.  No new laws.  Leave the 2nd Amendment alone.  Period.

There is a chance that I-594 will pass because of all the anti-gun and other socialist types in the urban areas west of the Cascades.  I-591 is the best chance we have to counter I-594 if it passes because they say two very different things. 

If both pass, the initiatives would go to the courts or most likely the legislature to fix the conflicts; I-591 would effectively negate much of I-594. 

If I-594 passes and I-591 does not, we are screwed.

If I-591 passes and I-594 does not, then we are OK; we keep our gun rights unless a new national system is passed which we would have to abide by anyway.

The message here is:

VOTE YES on I-591 (Protect Our Gun Rights)

VOTE NO on I-594 (The Anti-Gun Initiative)

Offline gfull

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Pilgrim
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 12
  • Location: Issaquah, WA
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #148 on: October 01, 2014, 09:49:56 AM »
I didn't peruse the entire thread, so forgive me if this link has been posted before.  Here is a link from a debate on KOMO:

Embarrassing to watch the I594 representatives.  They are completely illiterate on their own initiative.
 
http://www.komonews.com/home/video/KOMO-to-host-Town-Hall-Special-Guns-in-America-274134031.html?tab=video&c=y

Thoughts on some of the highlights of the law:
 
“’Transfer’ means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans.”  Loans: So, letting you shoot my AR would be against the law without a background check first.
 
You have to sell/transfer through a licensed dealer (FFL licensed), which will cost $$$.  The dealers will make out like bandits on this thing (not that they want to).  Also puts the licensed dealer in a bad position should the buyer/transferee subsequently commits a crime with the firearm.
 
Also adds a layer of work for the licensed dealer, in that they have to keep records of the sale of the firearm as if it was in inventory.  Sounds like they have to enter the firearm into inventory and then sell it out of inventory.  Will this not add B&O (paid by the licensed dealer) to the transaction, if the licensed dealer adds the firearm to its inventory?
 
You can’t let your spouse borrow your firearm except in very limited circumstances and at approved locations.
 
You can let someone borrow your firearm to hunt, BUT they can only possess the firearm where it is legal to hunt, so unless the transfer takes place on legal hunting ground, you can’t let someone borrow your firearm to hunt (ie: they can’t take the firearm from your home in Issaquah and drive to Colville, since that is not legal hunting ground).
 
Incredibly restrictive law…

Offline JimmyHoffa

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 14551
  • Location: 150 Years Too Late
Re: Initiatives 594 and 591
« Reply #149 on: October 01, 2014, 10:00:31 AM »
I didn't see it as an exception, but what about at a gun shop?  It sounds like legally you have to get the background check before they can let you handle something just to take a look at it...and then another check to give it back.  At a gun show would you have to point at stuff and have the other demonstrate? :dunno:  I know it sounds goofy, but if you go by 'the law' is that correct?  Or is that something in the approved range for transfer?  Horribly written initiative. 

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

8 year old attacked in 2023 ooops by shootnrun
[Today at 04:23:14 PM]


Browning X Bolt sticky stock by JKEEN33
[Today at 01:31:06 PM]


Mt. St. Helens Goat by CNELK
[Today at 01:09:43 PM]


2025 Montana alternate list by tdot24
[Today at 12:37:30 PM]


2025 Area 9 King Opener by CP
[Today at 11:53:21 AM]


Bonaparte Lake by TeacherMan
[Today at 10:17:00 AM]


Pocket Carry by hookr88
[Today at 09:48:30 AM]


Grouse in Vail? by Alan K
[Today at 09:28:46 AM]


Rabbits looking good so far! by Goshawk
[Today at 09:16:08 AM]


Game scouting in Vail for 2025. Not looking too good so far. by Goshawk
[Today at 09:04:01 AM]


Raffle ticket sales 2025 by JDArms1240
[Today at 06:12:34 AM]


Area 11 2025 - Well? by trophyhunt
[Today at 05:59:13 AM]


Good day of steelhead fishing! by huntnphool
[Yesterday at 10:49:23 PM]


Live bait albacore charter by hiway_99
[Yesterday at 07:10:28 PM]


Seeking packer OnCall for early archery unit 328 Naneum/Colockum by teanawayslayer
[Yesterday at 06:53:06 PM]


Surprise quality deer tag by Gentrys
[Yesterday at 06:01:07 PM]


Antelope next year? by Stein
[Yesterday at 05:52:08 PM]


New to bear hunting by ZaneHunts
[Yesterday at 05:35:10 PM]


Idaho unit 5 2025. Nov-ish by leonpeon2
[Yesterday at 03:42:59 PM]


3 pintails by hdshot
[Yesterday at 02:16:04 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal