Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: "Be it enacted by the people of the State of Washington.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    "Be it enacted by the people of the State of Washington.

    Is anyone interested in organizing an Initiative that would further our 2nd amendment?
    There is some time to get it done, the deadline for filing is 5 July.

    Initiatives & Referenda


    Filing Handbook

    The number of votes for Governor was. 1,582,802 | 8%=126,624.


    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Slightly right of center
    Posts
    166
    What did you have in mind? Actively penalize federal agents for over stepping into state authority? Define concrete penalties for city and county officials violating state preemption? Clearly define no duty to retreat? (Castle and/or stand your ground - I understand that these are pretty well worked out in case law but not well defined in state law.)

  3. #3
    Regular Member bmg50cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    WA - North Whidbey/ Deception Pass
    Posts
    307
    Here are a few ideas.


    • constitutional carry
    • legalize NFA firearms - short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, & full-automatics
    • amended a strong castle doctrine to the constitution
    • parking lot carry - HB 2137 - 2011-12 (what happened to that bill?)
    • campus carry
    • state preemption for knives or turn the CPL into CWL with exemption for those with CWL
    • eliminate the use tax on firearms transfers
    • create and enforce penalties for baseless calls to authorities concerning MWAGs (just like those that would cover someone yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater)

  4. #4
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Re Wording RCW 9.41.270

    The difficulty with something like this is the same difficulty the legislature is having. First agree to disagree then compromise and move on.

    Start with clarifying RCW 9.41.270 as previously discussed in THIS thread and HERE.

    Here is a link with enough information to determine how the State views 9.41.270


    I'm thinking the title should be worded in an Alinsky sort of fashion yet in keeping with the law.

    9.41.270
    Preventing the un-lawfull carrying or handling of weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm
    | Penalty | Exceptions.

    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  5. #5
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    While it would be great to improve the wording in many of RCW's concerning firearms and there is likelihood it could get on the ballet. The major hurdle is to invest a great deal of money into advertisements in promoting it passage.
    Remember the amount of money it took to privatize alcohol or marijuana, if you feel you can achieve the amount of funding to put forward an imitative as this great, but mind you will need thousands times more votes then will be gain in these forums and then you will have to contend with those votes that just did not like one small part of the wording and with hold their vote in the name of I did it my way.....

    Note that I am all for it, if it can be done.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    9.41.270
    Preventing the un-lawfull carrying or handling of weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm
    | Penalty | Exceptions.

    ~Whitney[/QUOTE]

    Looks good until they would strike the word UN-LAWFUL

  7. #7
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    If you are wanting to change something other then the title how about adding RCW 9.41.270(3)(e) Being lawfully carried in a holster.
    Last edited by BigDave; 02-17-2013 at 08:47 PM.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    How about an initiative to make proposing, sponsoring or voting in favor of a statute that a clear reading of the bill conflicts with the state constitution be an immediate resignation from the legislature, effective immediately?
    Last edited by Difdi; 02-17-2013 at 09:29 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Dolan Springs, AZ
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by bmg50cal View Post
    Here are a few ideas.


    • constitutional carry
    • legalize NFA firearms - short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, & full-automatics
    • amended a strong castle doctrine to the constitution
    • parking lot carry - HB 2137 - 2011-12 (what happened to that bill?)
    • campus carry
    • state preemption for knives or turn the CPL into CWL with exemption for those with CWL
    • eliminate the use tax on firearms transfers
    • create and enforce penalties for baseless calls to authorities concerning MWAGs (just like those that would cover someone yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater)
    Emphasis added as talking points.
    First is about the NFA.
    Article VI of the Constitution only says that federal laws are “supreme” when made “in pursuance of” the Constitution.
    This does not imply that any old law Our lovers of power (read that as Congress) wish to pass, actually bind the Several Sovereign States and the People to it, without question.
    It is a shame that in United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939), that Miller did not challenge his being arrested for failure to purchase a Tax-Stamp for a sawn-off (short barreled) shotgun as being that the NFA itself was unconstitutional as it violated the 2A. As it was he simply argued that the Tax-Stamp for a short barreled shotgun violated the 2A, and then did not present evidence that short barreled shotguns were in common Military use during WWI for close quarter combat, as well as were kept in Military inventory for guard realted functions. Had that been done, the NFA may have been struck down by the SCOTUS back in the late 1930's. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/fede.../174/case.html
    So our State following many others, such as the Missouri Legislature is trying to do, by passing Local Legislation Nulifying the Federal Laws with words to the effect of "All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 24 of the Washington Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state."

    Speaking of the Supreme Court.
    Let me say this as clearly as I can, those nine justices aren’t infallible gods.
    They ae not the final arbiter of what the Constitution means, as they have even questioned and subsequently overturned their own rulings in the past.
    The Constitution means what the Founders and Ratifiers told us it means, no matter what Our Congress, the President, or the Supreme Court wish to say.

    Now about the emphasis pertaining to our Washington State CPL.

    For those who are not aware, it used to be a CWP (Concealed Weapon Permit) years ago before Washington converted from a "May Issue" to "Shall Issue" State. My first Washington State Carry Permit was a CWP.
    Last edited by LkWd_Don; 02-18-2013 at 03:17 PM. Reason: Finished statement from premature posting
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement. The faults of a few, reflect badly on many, I therefore do not suggest anyone support WAC. My EDC is either a H&K USP .40 or a Taurus 689 .357 filled with Snake Loads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •