I-1639 mega thread

[Tundra]

Get the kids out of public schools...  Homeschool, private school, whatever it takes..  There are some great teachers out there, but they are hindered by crazy policies and wacky co-workers...  The stuff they teach these days..   

[Naches Sportsman]

You do realize California transplants have figured out the interstates in the west, right?

No matter where you go, you will be impacted by native Californians. Look at the other states out west that have blue in them. You'll see what I mean.


The destruction of Amerrica is too late to be stopped.

[ljsommer]

I thought I was aware of all the action items on the initiative but this gun-registry is news to me. Is this registry on all firearms or just semi-autos? If I bought bolt actions would they be on there? I assume semi-autos includes pistol purchases as well?

[ljsommer]

What if we just built the Trump wall... and then kept going to have it also surround California so that the Californians just stayed there?

We have been producing our own generations of progressive liberals right here.
Just take a look at what is being taught in colleges these days. I don't think that it's all California transplants giving us these results. It seems to me our public education system is a pipeline of liberal indoctrination, and some parents are content to let it be.

You're more right than you know.

[ljsommer]

The destruction of Amerrica is too late to be stopped.

By you maybe, but that kind of defeatism won't get us anywhere. Chin up, we've got it good.

[Fl0und3rz]

The law is written so that you are presented with an empty choice.  Comply or risk the consequences.

Isn't that true with any law?

Yes. But as with any law, there is the stated function and the actual function.

With taxes the stated function is to raise revenue and stated or unstated and actual function is to enforce social policy toward non-taxed items and away from taxed items, in addition to actually raising revenue.  Typically, generally applicable laws have stated and actual coextensive functions.  That has been the case for some time.  Lately, these diverge as the law has been used by the majority to harass the disfavored majority.


With gun laws, the stated function function is always safety and effective LE.  The actual function is to raise the compliance costs and risks of enjoying your 2A rights ever higher.  It knocks people off at the fringes, reduces the size of available 2A advocates (you stop advocating for a right you don't care about because you don't enjoy it), and pushes the envelope as to what people consider "reasonable" restrictions.  I suspect you see a problem with that safety and LE effectiveness benefit never materializing, when the grand bargain was struck, because laws are rarely revoked for lack of initial promised benefit.

With I-594, you have de facto registration, or at least the mechanism for de jure registration, once there are not enough 2A advocates to resist.  And over time, all guns in WA will have the de facto registration as the pre-I594 firearms become an ever-decreasing fraction of the total.

Now, all you need is a crime in which to investigate to use to trace the firearm.  Viola I-1639.  Evil gun owner may have not locked up his weapon properly, so we can go and use the limitless resources harass him and determine whether "he should have reasonably known" that his firearm was stolen within the minuscule reporting window.

These scenarios all do not take great stretches of the imagination as the experts suggest.  "Trust us?"  No thanks. 

Look, I'm considering selling our house and moving to another state after this election and previous ones which show the true colors of this state and its politicians. I voted no on 1639, like most on this forum, if not all. 

I am a couple steps ahead of you.

Bigtex is only respectfully interpreting the information from the law to make sure we understand what's in it and how it affects us. We can discuss this without thinking that anyone who disagrees with us is the enemy. He certainly is not that. After such a hugely crappy political season, with more to come, I suggest that we tone down the rhetoric toward each other and form our responses around this topic in such a way that we assume good intent on the part of those with whom we may not agree.

Bigtex and Co. is presenting a rose-colored view, from an LE perspective, blowing sunshine and skittles up our behinds.  He is selling something.  I am not buying, and so are others raising legitimate concerns and fears about how the law will be applied.

And then he is throwing around the "respect muh authority" garbage, when being confronted with such fears and concerns.  So he gets his buddy to join in and continue to demean people's concerns and fears. 


Otherwise, you make great points.  Thanks for being an arbiter on contentious issues.

[pianoman9701]

LE (Bigtex & Co.), almost without exception, were opposed to this initiative. Just saying. He's using his perspective to give us further insight. I doubt very much he supported this initiative, but I don't know. Has he stated?

[Kc_Kracker]

if it spreads to idaho fast theres always kansas :S

[Fl0und3rz]

LE (Bigtex & Co.), almost without exception, were opposed to this initiative. Just saying. He's using his perspective to give us further insight. I doubt very much he supported this initiative, but I don't know. Has he stated?

"Nowhere does it say guns have to be locked up!"

It says if you don't lock them, you risk these consequences.  The practical effect is the same.  You are playing semantic games.  It would be more honest to acknowledge the legitimate grievance people are raising.

Yes, you are right.  It does not say you HAVE to lock them up.  Why?  Because the risk of being ruled unconstitutional.  So they make the consequences of not making the desired so onerous as to remove volition from the choice.

But yeah, sure, we dont HAVE to.  That's comforting.

I'm not playing games. I would think most people with half a brain would report their gun stolen even before this law was in place 

And guess what, now if you do and someone uses your gun to kill someone you can't be charged.

Implying that someone who doesn't support the LE reporting requirement has less than half a brain sure seems supportive, from my perspective.


And such goes beyond "respectful interpretation."   I get and appreciate his perspective.  I don't get getting defensive when someone questions your authority over your fiefdom and slighting those who do.  His is an LE perspective.  People are raising concerns from their perspective. 

The law has two perspectives that are important.  Prosecution and defense.  That is why we have an adversarial justice system and why we have such due process and fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination, etc.  I don't want a sunshine and skittles prosecutor perspective to be substituted for a defense perspective.  You shouldn't either.

[bornhunter]

What part of Idaho you going to Kracker. I cant decide. Idaho has it all.

[Fl0und3rz]

ID, AK, WY, and UT are on my short list.  I'd probably also do TN or LA if it were just me.

ID and AK are probably doable from the wife's perspective.  We already sold our house.

[Woodchuck]

LE (Bigtex & Co.), almost without exception, were opposed to this initiative. Just saying. He's using his perspective to give us further insight. I doubt very much he supported this initiative, but I don't know. Has he stated?

"Nowhere does it say guns have to be locked up!"

It says if you don't lock them, you risk these consequences.  The practical effect is the same.  You are playing semantic games.  It would be more honest to acknowledge the legitimate grievance people are raising.

Yes, you are right.  It does not say you HAVE to lock them up.  Why?  Because the risk of being ruled unconstitutional.  So they make the consequences of not making the desired so onerous as to remove volition from the choice.

But yeah, sure, we dont HAVE to.  That's comforting.

I'm not playing games. I would think most people with half a brain would report their gun stolen even before this law was in place 

And guess what, now if you do and someone uses your gun to kill someone you can't be charged.

Implying that someone who doesn't support the LE reporting requirement has less than half a brain sure seems supportive, from my perspective.


And such goes beyond "respectful interpretation."   I get and appreciate his perspective.  I don't get getting defensive when someone questions your authority over your fiefdom and slighting those who do.  His is an LE perspective.  People are raising concerns from their perspective. 

The law has two perspectives that are important.  Prosecution and defense.  That is why we have an adversarial justice system and why we have such due process and fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination, etc.  I don't want a sunshine and skittles prosecutor perspective to be substituted for a defense perspective.  You shouldn't either.

Dude, you're going after the wrong guy for the wrong reasons.  Honestly man, take a breath and refocus, arguing with the same user group will be the end of us.

[Kc_Kracker]

What part of Idaho you going to Kracker. I cant decide. Idaho has it all.

preferably an area that isnt too hot in the summer, like north or east ID, might even creep over into MT

[Fl0und3rz]

Thanks. 

[bornhunter]

All the more reason to create the new state od Liberty. Eastern Wa and Eastern Or.