• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Did I overdo it?

Jered

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
162
Location
Whatcom County
One of my county council members replied to my message asking if I was being sarcastic.

Here's an excerpt of my response:

Washington State voters passed I-594, and that defines a firearm as a "weapon or device from which a projectile may be fired by means of an explosive such as gunpowder." The flare guns, nail guns, and novelty items that I listed all seem to fall within that definition of a firearm. I am asking you to petition the county prosecutor to prosecute any and all violations of I-594 as it revises state law, because the duty of his office is to prosecute criminal offenses that occur in his position. I am asking you to petition the sheriff's office as well, because they have a duty to enforce the laws of the State of Washington. If you allow them to ignore violations of this law, you are allowing them to undermine the very foundation of modern policing Robert Peel laid it out in his principal #5 which states that police need to demonstrate absolute and impartial service to the law. Every time that the sheriff's office knowingly allows any unlawful firearm sale and any time that the prosecutor declines to prosecute an unlawful firearm sale, they undermine public support and respect for the law. My goal in petitioning you as a resident of Whatcom County and one of your constituents was to seek your assistance in petitioning the Sheriff's Office to uphold the law as we the People of the State of Washington have enacted it. According to the Constitution of the State of Washington, all political power is inherent in the People. The People have spoken, and stated that they wish their government that derives its just power from the consent of the government to uphold state law, and require all items that the law defines as a firearm to be subject to a background check. We the People have Spoken, and revised the law to suit our requirements. I am simply calling upon the elected officials who derive their power from my consent and the consent of thousands and millions of people like myself to uphold the law as We the People have determined that it shall be written. To to otherwise is to fail the people who have delegated to you your political power.

Did I overdo it? If anyone else feels so inclined, they can use this as well.
 

SovereigntyOrDeath

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Coeur D Alene, Idaho
Sounds like you found a chink on the armor of the anti-gun law in your state.

Anybody with a powder actuated nail gun can potentially fall on the wrong side of the law.

The law sounds unconstitutional to me and I would rather see the thing repealed.

The sheriff is the ultimate law enforcement in your county and is sworn to uphold the Constitution.

Keep us posted.
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
From what I gather, Grim_KNight is more than "somewhat" involved in OC activism; I'd recommend looking at the thread he started about an uppity VP thinking the law need not apply on the college campus.

As to your question: no, you didn't "overdo it". If anything, it can be said that you are being forced to remind a county council member and the county prosecutor to fulfill their obligations.:) Hopefully they realize that feel-good, rushed, convoluted laws do nothing but criminalize Lawfully-Armed Citizens (LACs).
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
Sounds like you found a chink on the armor of the anti-gun law in your state.

Anybody with a powder actuated nail gun can potentially fall on the wrong side of the law. SNIP...

It is the "or device" part that criminalizes the powder actuated nail guns and even party poppers/streamers (the "novelty items" I'm assuming Jered listed). The wording of the law shows it was clearly written either without much understanding of the English language, without proper understanding of what a firearm is, and/or with the intent to make everyone a felon (unlikely, but you never can tell with antis).
 
Last edited:

Grim_Night

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
776
Location
Pierce County, Washington
From what I gather, Grim_KNight is more than "somewhat" involved in OC activism; I'd recommend looking at the thread he started about an uppity VP thinking the law need not apply on the college campus.

Which reminds me that I need to go back and replace all the stuff that I deleted from that thread. And I see what you did there >.>
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Either enforce the law to everyone equally or don't enforce the law at all. There is no just action in selective enforcement. plain and simple.

Aggressing against two people using an immoral law isn't somehow better than doing it to only one, unless two wrongs suddenly started making a right since the last time I checked.

There is no justice in the enforcement of an unjust law. Full stop.
 

Jered

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
162
Location
Whatcom County
Aggressing against two people using an immoral law isn't somehow better than doing it to only one, unless two wrongs suddenly started making a right since the last time I checked.

There is no justice in the enforcement of an unjust law. Full stop.

I'm going to leave this quote from a Taylor Caldwell book here and see if it helps you to understand.

While "defending" the devil, he must awaken the people to the presence of evil, and the horrors which it represented.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
I'm going to leave this quote from a Taylor Caldwell book here and see if it helps you to understand.

While "defending" the devil, he must awaken the people to the presence of evil, and the horrors which it represented.

Oh, so two wrongs make a right, but only when we can summon quotes from popular fiction to our defense?

Listen, guys, I'm all in favor of pointing out the absurdity of this law. I even think your letter is an appropriate means to do so – read as sarcasm.

But when you start seriously advocating "equitable" enforcement of an unjust law, you let your emotions cloud your judgment. You no longer possess the moral high ground. Plus, down that road lies the dark side.

Take my opinion, or leave it. You won't, however, convince me that it's ever moral to enforce an unjust law, even in the lame of "equitability", for I've had too long to think about such things.

(Would it have been "more moral" to require the Nazis to "equitably" gas everybody, or was the only possible moral outcome the end of their mass murder outright? You decide.)

In my estimation, it is immoral to enforce an unjust law. To the degree that you advocate for the enforcement ("equitable" or otherwise) of an unjust law, you are in my estimation immoral. That's really the long and short of it.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
I have a slightly different view. Hold to account those who do not enforce this law as it is currently written. Do not demand that they enforce this crap law equally. When they do not enforce it, even once, then drag their happy butts into a courtroom. The risk? Everybody gets nailed? Nope, no cop is gunna nail Pa Kettle for buying a nail gun. No cop is gunna arrest Little Jimmy working the Home Depot checkout counter for "transferring" the nail gin. Imagine, a cop wants to do a little home improving and needs a nail gun...

The law will be dispatched right quick and in a hurry. It is the state and their agents that let this happen, not the voters.
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
The more complex and convoluted the law the more power is given to the lawmakers and executors as they can make up their own interpretation on the fly. Remember their agenda is seldom straightforward. They will not respond to logic and have a logic tight compartment.

The only way to handle this is to sacrifice yourself and make a test case and have the law struck. Good luck with that.
 

Superlite27

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,277
Location
God's Country, Missouri
Are fireworks "powder actuated devices"?

Because if a roman candle, bottle rocket, or firecracker is considered "powder actuated".......

The 4th of July is going to be a very tedious time for FFL's and the BATFE with the untold number of background checks they will be processing in order for folks to buy fireworks.

What are the laws on fireworks stands, sales, and deployment in Washington?

Here in Missouri, anyone can simply stop by a fireworks store and load up, year round.

In the weeks before the 4th of July, tents begin popping up alongside the highways like mushrooms in a damp, shady spot in the woods.

I couldn't imagine the fiasco it would cause the BATFE and the general citizenry if they had to stand in line by the thousands just to purchase a few ladyfingers because of a law that was passed.

Not only would it be very lucrative for FFL's (the majority of which also donate heavily to pro 2A organizations) it would also have a tendency to frustrate idiots who voted for a law without thinking of the unintended consequences.

Having a brigade of dedicated pro 2A supporters ensuring that absolutely nobody broke the law by purchasing any "powder actuated devices" such as roman candles without a background check would be an upstanding and responsible thing to do, wouldn't it? I'd be ensuring that any fireworks vendors were conducting background checks as per state law. The police are sure going to be busy responding to any calls made to report unlawful purchases of powder actuated devices around the 4th of July.
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Oh, so two wrongs make a right, but only when we can summon quotes from popular fiction to our defense?

Listen, guys, I'm all in favor of pointing out the absurdity of this law. I even think your letter is an appropriate means to do so – read as sarcasm.

But when you start seriously advocating "equitable" enforcement of an unjust law, you let your emotions cloud your judgment. You no longer possess the moral high ground. Plus, down that road lies the dark side.

Take my opinion, or leave it. You won't, however, convince me that it's ever moral to enforce an unjust law, even in the lame of "equitability", for I've had too long to think about such things.

(Would it have been "more moral" to require the Nazis to "equitably" gas everybody, or was the only possible moral outcome the end of their mass murder outright? You decide.)

In my estimation, it is immoral to enforce an unjust law. To the degree that you advocate for the enforcement ("equitable" or otherwise) of an unjust law, you are in my estimation immoral. That's really the long and short of it.
Nailed it. :D +1 good explanation.
 

ak56

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
746
Location
Carnation, Washington, USA
Are fireworks "powder actuated devices"?

...

Fireworks are considered firearms under Washington law, but they are not subject to the general firearms laws (chapter 9.41).

9.41.320
Fireworks.


Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit the possession, sale, or use of fireworks when possessed, sold, or used in compliance with chapter 70.77 RCW.
 

mikeyb

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
554
Location
Bothell
If the law is never enforced then it will never be challenged. I-594 places the responsibility for the background check on the seller.

You sure? I'm not- not the way the document is written:

(3) Where neither party to a prospective firearms transaction is a licensed dealer, the parties to the transaction shall complete the sale or transfer through a licensed dealer as follows:
(c) The purchaser or transferee must complete, sign, and submit all federal, state, and local forms necessary to process the required background check to the licensed dealer conducting the background check.
 

O_Kellogg

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Messages
58
Location
Yelm, WA
You see, the purchaser or transferee may complete, sign, and submit every day of the week
and twice on Sundays, regardless of the existence of any hubcaps, bacon or firearms.

Means absolutely nothing, until you introduce the seller handing over a firearm. He performs
the act of transferring [with or without the BGC].

You cannot charge 2 people with a single act. Only one person commits an act.

The burden is on the seller.

OK
 

O_Kellogg

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Messages
58
Location
Yelm, WA
Separate statute; Separate crime.

If you're standing in the driveway as a look-out while I steal the car, you're not stealing the car. You're an accomplice.

Thanks for playing.

OK
 
Top