Initiatives 594 and 591

[protect2ndamd]

It is time to start the fight.  These Initiatives will be on the ballot in November.

VOTE NO on INITIATIVE-594

I-594 would NOT ensure “Universal Background Checks” - criminals would ignore, but I-594 would ensure  “Universal Handgun Registration” because ALL law-abiding handgun owners will be registered!

-WOULDN’T STOP CRIMINALS –
…Only law-abiding gun owners would comply
…Most criminals get guns through theft, on the black market, or from family and friends
…Straw purchasers already pass background checks and provide firearms to criminals

-BURDEN ON LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS
…Increased registration on handgun transfers
…If the buyer did not pass the background check, the dealer would be required to perform a second background check on the seller to return the firearm
…Would require virtually all transfers of firearms to be brokered through a licensed dealer (including most family transfers!)
   -I want to sell a firearm to my brother…go through a dealer.
   -I want to loan a firearm to my son…go through a dealer.
   -I am out shooting with my 21 year old son…can’t let him handle my firearm without going through a dealer.  (…but I can let my 16 year old son handle my firearm without dealer intervention – if supervised)
   -My 17 year old daughter is on the high school trapshooting team…she can no longer use my shotgun.
   -I am a rancher in Eastern WA and my 17 year old son takes my truck across the family property with my ranch rifle in the gun rack…I have just committed a gross misdemeanor.
…CPL holders NOT exempt
…Law enforcement officers not exempt when off-duty
…Would prohibit hunting by youth under age 18 without direct supervision and control
…Would double the waiting period on handgun sales from 5 days to 10 days and extend it to all private transfers
…Would extend the federal waiting period from 3 days to 10 days when checks are not approved immediately

-UNENFORCEABLE
…Only way to enforce this concept:  Set up widespread sting operations which would disproportionately impact law-abiding citizens and would be prohibitively expensive, furthering the DIVERSION of SCARCE LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES .

-MASSIVE GOVERNMENT DATABASE OF LAW-ABIDING HANDGUN OWNERS
…Data on law-abiding handgun owners maintained by Washington State (Department of Licensing)

-UNFAIR
…The records created by these dealer transfers will give the government the necessary tool to single out and collect more tax (“Use” Tax) from law-abiding firearm owners!
…The transfer fee payable to firearm dealers is essentially an additional “firearm transfer tax.”
This information supplied by NRA-ILA.

******************************************************************************************
ALSO - VOTE YES on INITIATIVE-591!

I-591 Requires that background checks must be implemented by the federal government, not the state.  If I-594 passes I-591 overrides it.

[mfswallace]

Why not vote no on both 

[Bean Counter]

Regardless: never register 

[timberfaller]

This is WHY you never vote for a Democrat!!

We kicked Jay out of office over the Brady bill,  he tucked his tail between his legs and moved to the west side.

Now he runs the state,  DID anyone think for a minute he would act different!!??

Your stuck on stupid, if you vote for a Democrat/RINO, YOUR part of the problem NOT the solution!

[Atroxus]

I am going to vote no on i-594, but to the OP, you really should fact-check before posting. The following is from the full text of the initiative which I am including a link to as well.

"Background checks would not be required for gifts between immediate family members or for antiques."

It also says nothing about having to do background check to let someone handle your firearm. It does state "loans" are not exempt though, so I suppose it could be interpreted that loaning a gun to a family member would not be exempt, but that gifting it would? 

All around a worthless and poorly written initiative, but I think we can fight it better with the truth than we can with lies. 

http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf

[Special T]

I would like to remind people that this state currently keeps a pistol registry for all Pistols bought at a dealer.

[csaaphill]

ya will vote no on the universal background check one and yes on the no more GUn ctrl act law they want passed and not allow the Gov to confiscate peoples guns except under what is already passed.
Problem is I read in the paper a Majority favor both and a slight majority favor the universal background check when selling a gun.
So if both passed it would go to the Courts!  
Can you imagine all the crap you will have to go through if 594 passes?
I wouldn't abide anyhows and hope most wouldnt either!
Can't enforce something they can't get a hold of Just like CT and NY not registering their assault rifles and saying nuts to your law.
If more people don't abide with this then they can't do nothing.

[Windwalker]

Tread lightly and be reminded anything you vote for may come back to haunt you. And your children..
Someone needs to come up with a crafty slogan so folks don't screw up and vote for the wrong bill-

591 is #1    and 594  opens hells door.. or some...better ...WAY better slogan...

This is where they are headed if we are not careful- read through some of this http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regs

Anyone voting for 594  needs to reconsider.

HI 594

Brief Summary of Bill

Provides that all firearms sales or transfers in whole or in part in Washington are subject to background checks unless specifically exempted by federal or state law.

Requires firearm sales or transfers between unlicensed persons to be completed by a licensed dealer according to specified procedures.

Establishes penalties and exemptions, and makes other changes to provisions governing firearms transactions.
 
All firearms sales or transfers are subject to background checks unless specifically exempted by federal or state law. This requirement applies to all sales or transfers in whole or in part in Washington, including sales and transfers through a dealer, at gun shows, on line, and between unlicensed persons. "Transfer" means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment, including gifts and loans.

HI 591

Brief Summary of Bill

Provides 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.

Provides that it is unlawful for any government agency to confiscate guns or other firearms from citizens without due process.

Under state and federal laws, firearms dealers (dealers) are required to have licenses in order to sell firearms. Under state law, a dealer includes anyone engaged in the business of selling firearms who has or is required to have a federal dealer's license. A person is not required to have a dealer's license in order to sell firearms if the person makes only occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or sells all or part of his or her personal collection of firearms.

State and federal law require dealers to conduct backgrounds checks on sales or transfers of firearms to unlicensed persons. Neither state nor federal law requires background checks for firearms sales or transfers by persons who are not dealers. However, it is unlawful for a person to transfer a firearm to another person whom he or she has reasonable cause to believe is ineligible to possess a firearm.

[huntrights]

A lot of pro-Second Amendment people worked very hard to get I-591 on the ballot; including many participants in the H-W forum.
YES on I-591: Protect Our Gun Rights


I-594 just feeds into the anti-gun agenda.
NO on I-594: the anti-gun initiative

[Wacenturion]

Someone needs to come up with a crafty slogan so folks don't screw up and vote for the wrong bill-

591 is #1    and 594  opens hells door.. or some...better ...WAY better slogan...

Totally agree....as a lot of people are going to be confused or uninformed.

591....You Keep Your Gun.....594...They'll Kick Down Your Door

[Fl0und3rz]

I saw the news (FOX 13) heralding the big I-594 kickoff today.  In it, they had a Seattle Jewish Federation shooting victim bloviating over how we're finally going to get background checks in WA, blah, blah, blah.  I wondered to myself, would that have stopped the shooter that victimized her that day.  I suspected not?  Any guesses?



No, of course not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Jewish_Federation_shooting

Preparations
Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske alleged that the suspect, Naveed Afzal Haq, had selected his target by researching "something Jewish" on the Internet. Haq is said to have legally purchased two semiautomatic handguns in Tri-Cities area stores, receiving the weapons on July 27, 2006, after the mandatory waiting period had expired. Haq allegedly received a traffic ticket on the way to the shooting, but did nothing to arouse the officer's suspicions.[3]

But that does not matter to these liberty hating fools, until the crocodile comes to eat them last.

[sakoshooter]

I just want to say thanx to the OP for starting this thread. Let's keep it at the top so it's first in everyone's minds. This is very important. And to my understanding, it is written acurately and not a bunch of lies as someone stated in a response.

[ghosthunter]

Maybe some leverage for 591 can be had by portraying 594 as a big money Bloomberg and he knows better than you do.

If I am correct he put some money on the table for 594.

[smittyJ]

Maybe some leverage for 591 can be had by portraying 594 as a big money Bloomberg and he knows better than you do.

If I am correct he put some money on the table for 594.

So did Hanour!

[Dave Workman]

Why not vote no on both 

It won't work that way. To beat 594, you MUST pass 591, and vote against 594.

That's the ONLY way to deliver the message that gun rights are not for sale around here.