Free: Contests & Raffles.
Quote from: bigtex on November 06, 2018, 09:39:54 PMQuote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 08:50:43 PMI like the language of “prohibited person” in the storage requirement what the heck does that mean? Way to vague against 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments Not vague at all.Per the initiative, "prohibited person" means a person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under state or federal law.What about 594? Registered to one person, but someone else has access?
Quote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 08:50:43 PMI like the language of “prohibited person” in the storage requirement what the heck does that mean? Way to vague against 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments Not vague at all.Per the initiative, "prohibited person" means a person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under state or federal law.
I like the language of “prohibited person” in the storage requirement what the heck does that mean? Way to vague against 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments
I lost more faith in humanity today, if that were possible.
Quote from: wadu1 on November 06, 2018, 09:13:48 PMQuote from: Boss .300 winmag on November 06, 2018, 09:09:02 PMQuote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 08:47:14 PMUnconstitutional Needs to go thru the courts and up on Kavanaughs desk Don’t think it would pass muster in the Supreme Court.Very true, but the Seattle Supreme court would not agreeThat’s fine. But it has to go thru the courts for a ruling and appeals and on to to the appellate courts. This law could back fire on anti gun groups because the courts may rule that anyone over 18 can legally purchase a firearm including a pistol because it is commonly used for self defense
Quote from: Boss .300 winmag on November 06, 2018, 09:09:02 PMQuote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 08:47:14 PMUnconstitutional Needs to go thru the courts and up on Kavanaughs desk Don’t think it would pass muster in the Supreme Court.Very true, but the Seattle Supreme court would not agree
Quote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 08:47:14 PMUnconstitutional Needs to go thru the courts and up on Kavanaughs desk Don’t think it would pass muster in the Supreme Court.
Unconstitutional Needs to go thru the courts and up on Kavanaughs desk
Quote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 09:21:05 PMQuote from: wadu1 on November 06, 2018, 09:13:48 PMQuote from: Boss .300 winmag on November 06, 2018, 09:09:02 PMQuote from: Hi-Liter on November 06, 2018, 08:47:14 PMUnconstitutional Needs to go thru the courts and up on Kavanaughs desk Don’t think it would pass muster in the Supreme Court.Very true, but the Seattle Supreme court would not agreeThat’s fine. But it has to go thru the courts for a ruling and appeals and on to to the appellate courts. This law could back fire on anti gun groups because the courts may rule that anyone over 18 can legally purchase a firearm including a pistol because it is commonly used for self defenseAren't initiatives only supposed to cover one subject? This one is training, age, storage, etc.
So my gun is locked up in my house behind a locked door, criminal breaks in steals gun, it was locked up. Is that a crime by me, or criminal?Being in a safe criminal can still break it open and steal it if they are savvy enough, so whose guilty then?
Quote from: Boss .300 winmag on November 06, 2018, 09:52:11 PMSo my gun is locked up in my house behind a locked door, criminal breaks in steals gun, it was locked up. Is that a crime by me, or criminal?Being in a safe criminal can still break it open and steal it if they are savvy enough, so whose guilty then?Your describing "limited access" vs "secure storage"a locked office (bedroom) is limited access and *should* fall short of secure storage.
Lost for words. If anybody with half a brain read the ENTIRE initiative, they would vote NO. Thanks Paul Allen.
Quote from: builtfordtough on November 06, 2018, 09:56:50 PMLost for words. If anybody with half a brain read the ENTIRE initiative, they would vote NO. Thanks Paul Allen.Yeah what a legacy that *censored* left.😤