What is new about it is that every gun owner needs to vote this November and vote NO on I-594 and YES on I-591. I predict we won't be able to get enough gun owners to vote no on I-594 to keep it from passing.
In short background checks for ALL firearm transfers.
If you don't do a background check on your buddy before he borrows your rifle/shotgun/pistol to go hunting, you get into trouble.
There was a great video explaining all of this somewhere on this forum.
The Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs, representing 4500 police officers, has voted to not endorse 594 and endorse 591. This Ccording to Dave Workman
http://www.examiner.com/article/exclusive-wacops-votes-to-oppose-gun-control-initiative-back-i-591
Watch those sneaky bastards they have two Associations often one that will support liberty infringements and one that will not. So they can pretend they didn't back something while they really did. Both associations share the same office and mailing address.
What's the other association?
Unless the demographics of the other association are significantly different I doubt it since most groups like this poll members to reach their endorsement
What's the other association?
Unless the demographics of the other association are significantly different I doubt it since most groups like this poll members to reach their endorsement
These organizations are run by the same people.
I think its Washington Sheriffs association.
and has the Washington Sheriff's association actually endorsed 594?
Edit.
Hmm three of the 4 officers of WSA are the sheriffs of Kittitas, Cowlitz, and Mason counties. The state is comprised of 39 counties the raw majority of which are rural in nature. Forgive me if I don't believe this group is guaranteed to endorse a gun control measure....
and has the Washington Sheriff's association actually endorsed 594?
King county prosocutor Dan Satterberg suggests he would not press charges against law abiding citizens who may become confused about the law. (ignorance of the law.....)
NOPE. The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs are remaining neutral.
So, it is fair to ask WHY, if you're not going to enforce the law, do you support the law? :question: :banghead:
If you take an oath to the constitution are you really neutral?
the constitution of the state provides for initatives......
even if WSSA doesn't take a position, we'll see plenty of LE groups in opposition. most people don't know the difference between the alphabet soup of associations representing various LE factions.
the constitution of the state provides for initatives......
Washington State Constitution said:SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
the constitution of the state provides for initatives......
even if WSSA doesn't take a position, we'll see plenty of LE groups in opposition. most people don't know the difference between the alphabet soup of associations representing various LE factions.
Original Washington Constitution 1878 said:Section 19. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but this shall not be construed as to justify the carrying of concealed weapons.
Washington Constitution Amended 1889 said:The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.