Post by: csaaphill on November 04, 2014, 11:07:16 PM
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 :mgun:
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!
Post by: Wacenturion on November 04, 2014, 11:44:24 PM
Post by: bearpaw on November 05, 2014, 04:01:52 AM
Post by: Jonathan_S on November 05, 2014, 04:14:58 AM
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. :twocents:
:yeah: No reason to do so otherwise. We have representation.
Post by: longwalker on November 05, 2014, 05:15:30 AM
Post by: HntnFsh on November 05, 2014, 05:59:54 AM
Post by: addicted2hunting on November 05, 2014, 08:14:06 AM
Post by: Bob33 on November 05, 2014, 08:29:01 AM
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 yearsFYI: 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.
Post by: Igottanewknee on November 05, 2014, 08:32:04 AM
Post by: bobcat on November 05, 2014, 08:45:18 AM
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 yearsFYI: 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? ???
Post by: Curly on November 05, 2014, 08:57:47 AM
Post by: huntrights on November 05, 2014, 09:19:59 AM
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
Post by: HntnFsh on November 05, 2014, 09:49:02 AM
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 yearsFYI: 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.
Post by: huntrights on November 05, 2014, 10:16:36 AM
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
Total YES % NO % YES NO
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.
Post by: jackelope on November 05, 2014, 10:20:23 AM
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 yearsFYI: 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.
Post by: shorthair15 on November 05, 2014, 10:27:27 AM
Post by: csaaphill on November 05, 2014, 11:44:10 AM
:chuckle: your kidding right?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. :twocents:
:yeah: No reason to do so otherwise. We have representation.
unless your only 25 or so and have not noticed Blue and Red make Purple.
Everytime something like this passes and we do nothing except play the political game I can hear those in thier graves rolling over of those who faught to create this country that was supposed to be free from this kind of Tyranny.
and were to refresh the tree of liberty from time to time but don't. and it's all for what it's supposed to be better for different generations? World peace, :chuckle: more like World Socialism and absolute power. >:(
Post by: csaaphill on November 05, 2014, 11:46:34 AM
Looks like it passed. I will not be complyingme either but don't have nothing I want to sell anyhows, but if I did hell no.
keep enough hidden for when your a convicted felon, and enough people have joined the ranks of felons then.............
Post by: Bob33 on November 05, 2014, 11:49:31 AM
As you stated they are considered firearms under state law. An individual who cannot legally possess or handle firearms in Washington state cannot legally handle or possess a muzzleloader. I-594 is a state law. I could be wrong, but I see no rationale for concluding they would not be subject to the same restrictions.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 yearsFYI: 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? ???
Post by: carlyoungs on November 05, 2014, 11:51:14 AM
Post by: TheHunt on November 05, 2014, 11:52:27 AM
It shows how stupid people are...
Post by: Curly on November 05, 2014, 11:56:21 AM
Post by: GEARHEAD on November 05, 2014, 01:41:31 PM
Post by: csaaphill on November 05, 2014, 01:52:06 PM
Post by: Jonathan_S on November 05, 2014, 06:14:21 PM
:chuckle: your kidding right?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. :twocents:
:yeah: No reason to do so otherwise. We have representation.
unless your only 25 or so and have not noticed Blue and Red make Purple.
Everytime something like this passes and we do nothing except play the political game I can hear those in thier graves rolling over of those who faught to create this country that was supposed to be free from this kind of Tyranny.
and were to refresh the tree of liberty from time to time but don't. and it's all for what it's supposed to be better for different generations? World peace, :chuckle: more like World Socialism and absolute power. >:(
Yes, those people did not have representation.
Post by: Stein on November 05, 2014, 06:23:05 PM
Quote
(9) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder.
If it goes boom and wasn't made in or before 1898, it is subject to 594.
Post by: KFhunter on November 05, 2014, 06:26:20 PM
Post by: csaaphill on November 06, 2014, 02:23:09 PM
I missed something not sure what all you meant/mean :dunno::chuckle: your kidding right?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. :twocents:
:yeah: No reason to do so otherwise. We have representation.
unless your only 25 or so and have not noticed Blue and Red make Purple.
Everytime something like this passes and we do nothing except play the political game I can hear those in thier graves rolling over of those who faught to create this country that was supposed to be free from this kind of Tyranny.
and were to refresh the tree of liberty from time to time but don't. and it's all for what it's supposed to be better for different generations? World peace, :chuckle: more like World Socialism and absolute power. >:(
Yes, those people did not have representation.
Post by: Jonathan_S on November 06, 2014, 02:34:07 PM
I am saying those people who fought and died in the American Revolution did not have anyone to represent them and were pressed into combat to get their point across. You are much better off and we still have a constitution (though it is encroached upon) and that is where I think the focus should be - on fighting a legal battle.
Post by: swinters on November 06, 2014, 04:25:01 PM
Your point seems to be that we should begin a violent revolt because you've had it up "to here". Then what?
I am saying those people who fought and died in the American Revolution did not have anyone to represent them and were pressed into combat to get their point across. You are much better off and we still have a constitution (though it is encroached upon) and that is where I think the focus should be - on fighting a legal battle.
Absolutely correct! I read that the Second Amendment Foundation, http://www.saf.org (http://www.saf.org), is coordinating a legal challenge. I sent them a donation and asked what else I could do. I've also written every one of my local, State and U.S representatives and strongly encourage all to do the same. We have to do way more than complain - We have to DO something about this and a legal challenge is by far the best, first way to go.
Post by: csaaphill on November 06, 2014, 04:51:16 PM
Your point seems to be that we should begin a violent revolt because you've had it up "to here". Then what?you'd be right I do feel a rovolt is needed been needed and will continue to be needed.
I am saying those people who fought and died in the American Revolution did not have anyone to represent them and were pressed into combat to get their point across. You are much better off and we still have a constitution (though it is encroached upon) and that is where I think the focus should be - on fighting a legal battle.
Representation doesn't mean theres no tyranny a elelcted offical can step on rights as well as a unelected one.
and where? the constitution is prety my much just toilet paper now days so NO were not better off!
Knew that's what you meant but wanted to clarify it first.
and not exatly they could of put up with King George if they wanted to, but they chose not to.
You sound 25 and not used to not being free or a lot free'er than what we are now.
all this playing the political game has got us no where the statement freedome is only won at the end of a gun is good but is useless when not used which is what the 2nd amendment is for.
WHen a majoirty can alienate something that is supposed to be unalienable and all we do is play this blanking game lose then back off wait for the next infringement :pee: an moan then do it again later on as if we still have peacefull means of adressing the GOv and or people and expect them to listen is nothing but a joke to me so ya Im ready we have no recource left and haven't had any for a very long time, but people keep hoping that something or someone will come along and bail us out of this mess :stup:
is like pulling your own teeth.
an oh they had representation if you call whoever was in power at the time Representation they had it Much like we have whoever's in power and only if they care or want to listen
Persoanlly we haven't had true good Representation since i've been around it's all been whatever the status quoe and thier agenda has been.
Post by: Jonathan_S on November 06, 2014, 07:04:02 PM
I'm 24 which means it doesn't matter what I think anyway :chuckle:
Post by: csaaphill on November 06, 2014, 11:34:44 PM
Post by: huntrights on November 07, 2014, 09:24:06 AM
There are many bad laws that are passed and imposed on the people of this country. If the People believe the laws are unconstitutional, or they don't like the laws, they must work to change the laws. The judicial and legislative processes are how that is done. That is why it is so important that we ALL VOTE, and VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution. The People need to be actively engaged in the political process so we ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. Because the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic, laws CANNOT violate the Constitution or Bill of Rights regardless of whether they were voted into place by a misled public (i.e. I-594) or by a wrongly biased legislature.
It is unfortunate, but it is very obvious on national, state, and local levels that it has been primarily the (D) elected officials/representatives that have attacked our Second Amendment rights and other rights (i.e. private property rights). There are some good (D's) that support and defend our Second Amendment rights and hunting; we should support them if they are good representatives of the People. The NRA rates candidates based on their votes, or a questionnaire if they don't have a voting record. so it is very obvious who supports our Second Amendment rights and who does not. There are other organizations that also do this. The ratings are non-partisan. A clear message to people in this forum (all political parties - all freedom-loving Americans) is to VOTE only for candidates that have shown they support our Second Amendment rights and hunting - DO NOT vote party lines - DO NOT vote for candidates that have shown themselves to be "Political Hacks".
I-594, if allowed to be implemented, will be an extremely bad law as written. It either needs to be thrown out or significantly changed via the judicial and legislative processes.
For those that would like to get a feel for why getting engaged in our political processes is so important, consider reading the following book:
"Confrontational Politics"
by Senator H. L. Richardson, Ret.
http://www.amazon.com/Confrontational-Politics-H-L-Richardson/dp/0982707452/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415378893&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=cfrontational+politics
Post by: Fl0und3rz on November 07, 2014, 09:31:39 AM
Post by: csaaphill on November 08, 2014, 12:38:11 AM
:twocents:In an ideal world without an agenda this statement would mean something sorry but Our Republic died in 1865 since then it's been a mob rules Deomocrocy. The true problem is the supreme court they have ruled against the constitution many times. Terry stops for one, stop and frisk, in NY for another. they have upheld chekcpoints and anytime someone comes along to challenge it they either rule against that person or don't even listen so no all avenues for peacefull protest are dead all that's left is for us to realise that and either make the hard choice to do what we know we should of done many years ago, or accept it and get in step!
There are many bad laws that are passed and imposed on the people of this country. If the People believe the laws are unconstitutional, or they don't like the laws, they must work to change the laws. The judicial and legislative processes are how that is done. That is why it is so important that we ALL VOTE, and VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution. The People need to be actively engaged in the political process so we ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. Because the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic, laws CANNOT violate the Constitution or Bill of Rights regardless of whether they were voted into place by a misled public (i.e. I-594) or by a wrongly biased legislature.
It is unfortunate, but it is very obvious on national, state, and local levels that it has been primarily the (D) elected officials/representatives that have attacked our Second Amendment rights and other rights (i.e. private property rights). There are some good (D's) that support and defend our Second Amendment rights and hunting; we should support them if they are good representatives of the People. The NRA rates candidates based on their votes, or a questionnaire if they don't have a voting record. so it is very obvious who supports our Second Amendment rights and who does not. There are other organizations that also do this. The ratings are non-partisan. A clear message to people in this forum (all political parties - all freedom-loving Americans) is to VOTE only for candidates that have shown they support our Second Amendment rights and hunting - DO NOT vote party lines - DO NOT vote for candidates that have shown themselves to be "Political Hacks".
I-594, if allowed to be implemented, will be an extremely bad law as written. It either needs to be thrown out or significantly changed via the judicial and legislative processes.
For those that would like to get a feel for why getting engaged in our political processes is so important, consider reading the following book:
"Confrontational Politics"
by Senator H. L. Richardson, Ret.
http://www.amazon.com/Confrontational-Politics-H-L-Richardson/dp/0982707452/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415378893&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=cfrontational+politics
The right to keep and bear arms was giving to do just that bear arms against those that oppress and despots but does no good if we don't!
Sorry I respect you huntrights but no we lost and all that's left now is like I said revolt or get inline. Both Parties have an agenda in mind so does the supreme court which they've ruled along those lines many many times
Post by: Mrninninnin on November 09, 2014, 08:41:56 AM
TO: All media organizations and groups.
FROM: Gavin Seim, lead organizer of the “I WILL NOT Comply Rally”.
Initiative 594 just passed in Washington State, bringing on residents mandatory gun background checks and making it a felony to privately purchase or even hand a gun to a friend without government permission. We the people of Washington State will not comply with this lawless legislation. The highest law is that of liberty and our Constitution. Our rights will be upheld.
On Dec 13th 2014, just after the law is legally in effect, we stand and disobey the illegal restrictions of i594. We must not wait for our rights to be decided but act swiftly to affirm them. In under 72 hours over 5000 have RSVP’d to this stand on Capital grounds in Olympia and assert their God given rights.
Learn more about this peaceful civil rebellion here: http://callmegav.com/ral/ (http://callmegav.com/ral/)
View the event page here: https://www.facebook.com/events/788109621237033 (https://www.facebook.com/events/788109621237033)
Joining in the event will be speakers, patriots and families from across the State to remind our legislators that lawless legislation will not be obeyed and to teach others about their rights.
Will you bow down and lick the boots of tyrants, or will you stand for the liberty of your children? We are not asking permission, we are not standing silent. Our birthright is not theirs to take. We stand peaceful, principled, firm and resolute for the liberty so many have perished for. We stand to uphold law and we will not comply with lawlessness from government.
We Stand! Stand with us.
In Liberty – Gavin Seim.
gavinforliberty@gmail.com
Post by: huntrights on November 09, 2014, 06:34:59 PM
:twocents:In an ideal world without an agenda this statement would mean something sorry but Our Republic died in 1865 since then it's been a mob rules Deomocrocy. The true problem is the supreme court they have ruled against the constitution many times. Terry stops for one, stop and frisk, in NY for another. they have upheld chekcpoints and anytime someone comes along to challenge it they either rule against that person or don't even listen so no all avenues for peacefull protest are dead all that's left is for us to realise that and either make the hard choice to do what we know we should of done many years ago, or accept it and get in step!
There are many bad laws that are passed and imposed on the people of this country. If the People believe the laws are unconstitutional, or they don't like the laws, they must work to change the laws. The judicial and legislative processes are how that is done. That is why it is so important that we ALL VOTE, and VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution. The People need to be actively engaged in the political process so we ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. Because the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic, laws CANNOT violate the Constitution or Bill of Rights regardless of whether they were voted into place by a misled public (i.e. I-594) or by a wrongly biased legislature.
It is unfortunate, but it is very obvious on national, state, and local levels that it has been primarily the (D) elected officials/representatives that have attacked our Second Amendment rights and other rights (i.e. private property rights). There are some good (D's) that support and defend our Second Amendment rights and hunting; we should support them if they are good representatives of the People. The NRA rates candidates based on their votes, or a questionnaire if they don't have a voting record. so it is very obvious who supports our Second Amendment rights and who does not. There are other organizations that also do this. The ratings are non-partisan. A clear message to people in this forum (all political parties - all freedom-loving Americans) is to VOTE only for candidates that have shown they support our Second Amendment rights and hunting - DO NOT vote party lines - DO NOT vote for candidates that have shown themselves to be "Political Hacks".
I-594, if allowed to be implemented, will be an extremely bad law as written. It either needs to be thrown out or significantly changed via the judicial and legislative processes.
For those that would like to get a feel for why getting engaged in our political processes is so important, consider reading the following book:
"Confrontational Politics"
by Senator H. L. Richardson, Ret.
http://www.amazon.com/Confrontational-Politics-H-L-Richardson/dp/0982707452/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415378893&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=cfrontational+politics
The right to keep and bear arms was giving to do just that bear arms against those that oppress and despots but does no good if we don't!
Sorry I respect you huntrights but no we lost and all that's left now is like I said revolt or get inline. Both Parties have an agenda in mind so does the supreme court which they've ruled along those lines many many times
Who submits nominations to for Supreme Court positions? Answer: The President
Who VOTES for the President? Answer: The People
Who gives final confirmation/approval of the nomination? Answer: The U.S. Senate
Who VOTES for the Senators? Answer: The People
The point is - We must ALL be engaged in the political process and work continuously to ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. We must VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution.
Post by: csaaphill on November 10, 2014, 01:12:22 AM
:twocents:In an ideal world without an agenda this statement would mean something sorry but Our Republic died in 1865 since then it's been a mob rules Deomocrocy. The true problem is the supreme court they have ruled against the constitution many times. Terry stops for one, stop and frisk, in NY for another. they have upheld chekcpoints and anytime someone comes along to challenge it they either rule against that person or don't even listen so no all avenues for peacefull protest are dead all that's left is for us to realise that and either make the hard choice to do what we know we should of done many years ago, or accept it and get in step!
There are many bad laws that are passed and imposed on the people of this country. If the People believe the laws are unconstitutional, or they don't like the laws, they must work to change the laws. The judicial and legislative processes are how that is done. That is why it is so important that we ALL VOTE, and VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution. The People need to be actively engaged in the political process so we ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. Because the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic, laws CANNOT violate the Constitution or Bill of Rights regardless of whether they were voted into place by a misled public (i.e. I-594) or by a wrongly biased legislature.
It is unfortunate, but it is very obvious on national, state, and local levels that it has been primarily the (D) elected officials/representatives that have attacked our Second Amendment rights and other rights (i.e. private property rights). There are some good (D's) that support and defend our Second Amendment rights and hunting; we should support them if they are good representatives of the People. The NRA rates candidates based on their votes, or a questionnaire if they don't have a voting record. so it is very obvious who supports our Second Amendment rights and who does not. There are other organizations that also do this. The ratings are non-partisan. A clear message to people in this forum (all political parties - all freedom-loving Americans) is to VOTE only for candidates that have shown they support our Second Amendment rights and hunting - DO NOT vote party lines - DO NOT vote for candidates that have shown themselves to be "Political Hacks".
I-594, if allowed to be implemented, will be an extremely bad law as written. It either needs to be thrown out or significantly changed via the judicial and legislative processes.
For those that would like to get a feel for why getting engaged in our political processes is so important, consider reading the following book:
"Confrontational Politics"
by Senator H. L. Richardson, Ret.
http://www.amazon.com/Confrontational-Politics-H-L-Richardson/dp/0982707452/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415378893&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=cfrontational+politics
The right to keep and bear arms was giving to do just that bear arms against those that oppress and despots but does no good if we don't!
Sorry I respect you huntrights but no we lost and all that's left now is like I said revolt or get inline. Both Parties have an agenda in mind so does the supreme court which they've ruled along those lines many many times
Who submits nominations to for Supreme Court positions? Answer: The President
Who VOTES for the President? Answer: The People
Who gives final confirmation/approval of the nomination? Answer: The U.S. Senate
Who VOTES for the Senators? Answer: The People
The point is - We must ALL be engaged in the political process and work continuously to ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. We must VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution.
Post by: csaaphill on November 10, 2014, 01:13:30 AM
1.Majority belief in something does not necessarily mean that it’s true.:twocents:In an ideal world without an agenda this statement would mean something sorry but Our Republic died in 1865 since then it's been a mob rules Deomocrocy. The true problem is the supreme court they have ruled against the constitution many times. Terry stops for one, stop and frisk, in NY for another. they have upheld chekcpoints and anytime someone comes along to challenge it they either rule against that person or don't even listen so no all avenues for peacefull protest are dead all that's left is for us to realise that and either make the hard choice to do what we know we should of done many years ago, or accept it and get in step!
There are many bad laws that are passed and imposed on the people of this country. If the People believe the laws are unconstitutional, or they don't like the laws, they must work to change the laws. The judicial and legislative processes are how that is done. That is why it is so important that we ALL VOTE, and VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution. The People need to be actively engaged in the political process so we ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. Because the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic, laws CANNOT violate the Constitution or Bill of Rights regardless of whether they were voted into place by a misled public (i.e. I-594) or by a wrongly biased legislature.
It is unfortunate, but it is very obvious on national, state, and local levels that it has been primarily the (D) elected officials/representatives that have attacked our Second Amendment rights and other rights (i.e. private property rights). There are some good (D's) that support and defend our Second Amendment rights and hunting; we should support them if they are good representatives of the People. The NRA rates candidates based on their votes, or a questionnaire if they don't have a voting record. so it is very obvious who supports our Second Amendment rights and who does not. There are other organizations that also do this. The ratings are non-partisan. A clear message to people in this forum (all political parties - all freedom-loving Americans) is to VOTE only for candidates that have shown they support our Second Amendment rights and hunting - DO NOT vote party lines - DO NOT vote for candidates that have shown themselves to be "Political Hacks".
I-594, if allowed to be implemented, will be an extremely bad law as written. It either needs to be thrown out or significantly changed via the judicial and legislative processes.
For those that would like to get a feel for why getting engaged in our political processes is so important, consider reading the following book:
"Confrontational Politics"
by Senator H. L. Richardson, Ret.
http://www.amazon.com/Confrontational-Politics-H-L-Richardson/dp/0982707452/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415378893&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=cfrontational+politics
The right to keep and bear arms was giving to do just that bear arms against those that oppress and despots but does no good if we don't!
Sorry I respect you huntrights but no we lost and all that's left now is like I said revolt or get inline. Both Parties have an agenda in mind so does the supreme court which they've ruled along those lines many many times
Who submits nominations to for Supreme Court positions? Answer: The President
Who VOTES for the President? Answer: The People
Who gives final confirmation/approval of the nomination? Answer: The U.S. Senate
Who VOTES for the Senators? Answer: The People
The point is - We must ALL be engaged in the political process and work continuously to ensure we have representation that is working for us and our rights and freedoms, not for a few anti-gun billionaires, or for their own ideological agendas. We must VOTE only for people that will uphold their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution.
2.Majorities are capable of being just as tyrannical as kings.
3.Historically, democracies have elected tyrannical leaders.
The second avenue toward totalitarian tyranny is “free elections.” It can happen that a totalitarian party with great popularity gains such momentum and so many votes that it becomes legally and democratically a country’s master. This happened in Germany in 1932 when no less than 60 per cent of the electorate voted for totalitarian despotism: for every two National Socialists there was one international socialist in the form of a Marxist Communist, and another one in the form of a somewhat less Marxist Social Democrat. Under these circum stances liberal democracy was doomed, since it had no longer a majority in the Reichstag. This development could have been halted only by a military dictatorship (as envisaged by General von Schleicher who was later murdered by the Nazis) or by a restoration of the Hohenzollerns (as planned by Bruning). Yet, within the democratic and constitutional framework, the National Socialists were bound to win.
Post by: csaaphill on November 10, 2014, 02:05:20 AM
"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants" (Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)
Post by: huntrights on November 10, 2014, 03:50:26 PM
:twocents:
I-594 will create a bad law. The way to fix the I-594 issue is through our judicial and legislative processes.
Our country is a Constitutional Republic; our representatives take an Oath of Office to support and defend our Constitution, and they must govern to the existing Constitution and Bill of Rights. If they do not, then they must be removed from their position via our VOTE, impeachment, and whatever other legal means we have of removing bad players from the elected positions they may hold. It is the system we have to work with and it is the best in the world.
This is why it is so important for people to stop voting party lines. If the candidates are not supporting and defending our Constitutional rights, then the People must stop voting for them. Voting should not be viewed like a football game; the reds (Republicans) against the blues (Democrats) and/or purples (Independents). Our rights and freedoms are on the line every time we vote. Voters need to stop voting for people that continue to attack our rights and freedoms in support of some liberal/progressive/socialist agendas. Voters must vote only for people that will support and defend our Constitution and ALL of our rights and freedoms.
Apathy kills freedom; ALL freedom-loving Americans must get more engaged in the political process to ensure we keep the rights and freedoms we fought so hard to obtain.
Post by: csaaphill on November 10, 2014, 10:41:45 PM
and when that doesn't work :mgun: sorry had too :chuckle:
:twocents:
I-594 will create a bad law. The way to fix the I-594 issue is through our judicial and legislative processes.
Our country is a Constitutional Republic; our representatives take an Oath of Office to support and defend our Constitution, and they must govern to the existing Constitution and Bill of Rights. If they do not, then they must be removed from their position via our VOTE, impeachment, and whatever other legal means we have of removing bad players from the elected positions they may hold. It is the system we have to work with and it is the best in the world.
This is why it is so important for people to stop voting party lines. If the candidates are not supporting and defending our Constitutional rights, then the People must stop voting for them. Voting should not be viewed like a football game; the reds (Republicans) against the blues (Democrats) and/or purples (Independents). Our rights and freedoms are on the line every time we vote. Voters need to stop voting for people that continue to attack our rights and freedoms in support of some liberal/progressive/socialist agendas. Voters must vote only for people that will support and defend our Constitution and ALL of our rights and freedoms.
Apathy kills freedom; ALL freedom-loving Americans must get more engaged in the political process to ensure we keep the rights and freedoms we fought so hard to obtain.
Post by: hub on November 11, 2014, 12:19:33 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on November 11, 2014, 11:15:03 AM
The problem with judicial and legislative process is that the state legislature is not allowed to stop a bad citizen sponsored initiative. All the legislature or governor can do is grab there ballot and vote like the rest of us. That's how this state works.
This is absolutely incorrect. Our elected representatives failed us.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,164549.msg2170394.html#msg2170394 (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,164549.msg2170394.html#msg2170394)