594 is winning while 591 is losing

[csaaphill]

Just seen 594 is winning how can people blatently violate the constitution and have no reprocussions?
Majority rules as this was never what our Founding fathers had in mind. Seriously it seems people even if against this kind of crap just shrugg it off like it's no big deal. If you sense I'm on my soap box you'd be right. Compromise
I know original background checks that passed under Clinton are unconstitutional all you need to do is look at all their quotes.
591 is going down in flames too.
Listen up I expect no compliance at all with this none whatsoever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wake me up when people get enough guts!!!!!!!! Totally unconstitutional and we should be up in arms literally!

[Wacenturion]

I'm right there with you.  As I have said in a couple threads....NRA, and others need to attack it legally as soon as possible.....won't stand up.

[bearpaw]

Has this been called yet?

[Jonathan_S]

I'm right there with you.  As I have said in a couple threads....NRA, and others need to attack it legally as soon as possible.....won't stand up.

  No reason to do so otherwise.  We have representation.

[longwalker]

Looks like it passed.  I will not be complying

[HntnFsh]

We voted no on 594 and reluctantly voted yes on 591. As I feel its a lesser of 2 evils thing and had no choice. Fortunately it wont affect me as I have no firearms! And no intentions of aquiring any! I will be working on the wife, talking her into moving to a more friendly state when I retire in a few years

[addicted2hunting]

It makes me sick! Is there anything that can be done now? Supreme Court?

[Bob33]

We voted no on 594 and reluctantly voted yes on 591. As I feel its a lesser of 2 evils thing and had no choice. Fortunately it wont affect me as I have no firearms! And no intentions of aquiring any! I will be working on the wife, talking her into moving to a more friendly state when I retire in a few years

FYI: if someone owns muzzleloaders, they are considered firearms in Washington and are subject to the same restrictions which means they cannot be transferred with a background check, subject to the same exemptions.

[Igottanewknee]

Watch out, they will be coming for your bows next......

[bobcat]

We voted no on 594 and reluctantly voted yes on 591. As I feel its a lesser of 2 evils thing and had no choice. Fortunately it wont affect me as I have no firearms! And no intentions of aquiring any! I will be working on the wife, talking her into moving to a more friendly state when I retire in a few years

FYI: if someone owns muzzleloaders, they are considered firearms in Washington and are subject to the same restrictions which means they cannot be transferred with a background check, subject to the same exemptions.

Are you sure about that? I know they're considered to be firearms under state law, but they are not firearms under federal law. Currently when you purchase a muzzleloader in this state you do not need to go through an FFL. How does 594 change that?   

[Curly]

Muzzleloaders do seem to be kind of a grey area.  I know you can currently order one and have it shipped directly to your home address without going thru a FFL.  But is that just because the law was not enforced and technically we should have been required to go thru an FFL? 

[huntrights]

Black-powder muzzle-loaders are considered antiques even if they are new (If they cannot be converted into a modern firearm).

Last check indicated no FFL requirement; however, call the following to verify for yourselves:

Your county Sheriff's Office
DOL - Firearms: 360-664-6616
ATF: 206-204-3205

[HntnFsh]

We voted no on 594 and reluctantly voted yes on 591. As I feel its a lesser of 2 evils thing and had no choice. Fortunately it wont affect me as I have no firearms! And no intentions of aquiring any! I will be working on the wife, talking her into moving to a more friendly state when I retire in a few years

FYI: if someone owns muzzleloaders, they are considered firearms in Washington and are subject to the same restrictions which means they cannot be transferred with a background check, subject to the same exemptions.

I dont have muzzleloader anymore either. I think I left it leaning against a tree the day I left Dayton. Not worth the drive and expense to go look.

[huntrights]

Has this been called yet?

An official call on this may not have happened yet, but it doesn't look good. 

If the ballots remaining to be counted (377,009) follow the same county YES/NO percentages, I-591 will not make it; it needs over 50%.

http://results.vote.wa.gov/results/current/State-Measures-Initiative-Measure-No-591-Concerns-firearms_ByCounty.html

Projected outcome (my estimate)

                             Total                 YES %        NO %        YES            NO
Projected total     1,579,134     46.38%     53.62%     732,460     846,674

However, if a very large percentage of the remaining ballots are YES on I-591, then there might be a chance - but don't count on it.

It is a shame that some of our own may have voted NO on I-591 and maybe YES on I-594 (based on some of the posts in this forum).  An initiative that has an influx of $10 million cash from anti-gun billionaires will obviously have a very good chance of passing.  Too many people fell for the propaganda BS purchased and disseminated by these anti-gun zealots.  WA was an anti-gun test state for this type of initiative; watch for similar initiatives in other states now that they succeeded here.

If I-591 passed, it would have conflicted with I-594 and put an anchor on it.  Now it appears we will have to fight to remove the many bad parts of I-594 through litigation and in the legislature.  This will take lots of time, effort, and money.  In the mean time, be very careful with simple "transfers" or "loans" of firearms (i.e. let a friend shoot your gun while target practicing on public land); you just might break I-594 laws that can turn you into a felon.

Those who voted the wrong way will soon realize they made a very bad decision; that is, unless they fall into the category of anti-gun, liberal-progressive-Socialists that continually strive to chip away at our rights and freedoms.

11-7-14 Update: Not sure about reported numbers now.  Today, the WA Secretary of State website says there are 349,004 ballots still on hand to be processed.  On 11-5-14, there were 377,009 ballots still on hand to be processed.  The I-591 vote tally:

Date             YES               NO             Ballots not counted
11-5-14        546,366       655,759      377,009
11-7-14        738,296       892,771      349,004
Difference     191,930       237,012        28,005

The change in YES/NO numbers indicates 428,942 additional ballots were counted since 11-5-14.  How can that be if there were only 377,009 remaining on the 5th, and the site says there are 349,004 ballots still remaining to be counted today.  This indicates we cannot completely rely on the numbers shown on the website.  We'll just have to see how things end up when they claim all ballots have been counted.  The numbers were updated again as this was being written.

      

[jackelope]

We voted no on 594 and reluctantly voted yes on 591. As I feel its a lesser of 2 evils thing and had no choice. Fortunately it wont affect me as I have no firearms! And no intentions of aquiring any! I will be working on the wife, talking her into moving to a more friendly state when I retire in a few years

FYI: if someone owns muzzleloaders, they are considered firearms in Washington and are subject to the same restrictions which means they cannot be transferred with a background check, subject to the same exemptions.

Are you sure about that? I know they're considered to be firearms under state law, but they are not firearms under federal law. Currently when you purchase a muzzleloader in this state you do not need to go through an FFL. How does 594 change that?   

It's 591 that will change that I believe. Now our background checks and transfers, etc. are not limited to federal regulation. WA can basically make up their own rules now.