I-1491 Gun confiscation without being convicted

solus said:

jeff & whitney...this thread is about a new initiative rolling towards those citizens who have and carry firearms.

as i have previously stated, if someone would draw up a viable commentary for me to send to ms Rolfes and others of her ilk i will spend the 6 dollars sending them off.

ipse

Click to expand...

I kind of drifted of course there a bit, you are right of course with regard to this new initiative.
I would submit "viable" is subjective, as this thread has many viable comments from each person who has contributed.

Your efforts do not go unnoticed, yet it is incumbent upon "we the people", each one of us to notify our elected representatives.

For the most part these folks don't have the background or intimate knowledge as most of the folks who posted here. The technical details matter when it comes to law, we may be stuck with this poorly crafted legislation for a while until the legislators can be educated.

~Whitney

Whitney said:

I kind of drifted of course there a bit, you are right of course with regard to this new initiative.
I would submit "viable" is subjective, as this thread has many viable comments from each person who has contributed.

Your efforts do not go unnoticed, yet it is incumbent upon "we the people", each one of us to notify our elected representatives.

For the most part these folks don't have the background or intimate knowledge as most of the folks who posted here. The technical details matter when it comes to law, we may be stuck with this poorly crafted legislation for a while until the legislators can be educated.

~Whitney

Click to expand...

then per your advice, i shall stand down and do nothing ~ until two years after the fact.

ipse

??Confused??

solus said:

then per your advice, i shall stand down and do nothing ~ until two years after the fact.

ipse

Click to expand...

I must have done a poor job conveying my point.

It was not my intent to advise you to stand down and do nothing.

My point was one person [solus] cannot bear the load for "we the people", each and every one of us must weigh in individually.
The time it has taken each one of us to write our comments and complaints or "whine" can just as easily be targeted to our elected representatives.

Just do it, it gets easier every time.

~Whitney

Whitney said:

I must have done a poor job conveying my point.

It was not my intent to advise you to stand down and do nothing.

My point was one person [solus] cannot bear the load for "we the people", each and every one of us must weigh in individually.
The time it has taken each one of us to write our comments and complaints or "whine" can just as easily be targeted to our elected representatives.

Just do it, it gets easier every time.

~Whitney

Click to expand...

Spot on, just do it should be our motto.

Jeff Hayes said:

Spot on, just do it should be our motto.

Click to expand...

Sorry, Jeff, that is trademarked by Nike. I humbly propose a phrase frequently yelled at me by the girlfriend when I procrastinate on her honey-do list: "Do it already!"

Boomboy007 said:

Sorry, Jeff, that is trademarked by Nike. I humbly propose a phrase frequently yelled at me by the girlfriend when I procrastinate on her honey-do list: "Do it already!"

Click to expand...

LOL betta listen to her.

Whitney said:

I must have done a poor job conveying my point.
It was not my intent to advise you to stand down and do nothing.
My point was one person [solus] cannot bear the load for "we the people", each and every one of us must weigh in individually.
The time it has taken each one of us to write our comments and complaints or "whine" can just as easily be targeted to our elected representatives.

Just do it, it gets easier every time.

~Whitney

Click to expand...

solus said:

View attachment 13169

Click to expand...

Cursing the darkness is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This bill would be a violation of the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments of the bill of rights

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Freedom1Man said:

This bill would be a violation of the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments of the bill of rights

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Is that because YOU say so or because a Court has ruled as such? Funny thing, only the Court rulings have any effect on how the laws work.

amlevin said:

Is that because YOU say so or because a Court has ruled as such? Funny thing, only the Court rulings have any effect on how the laws work.

Click to expand...

Long time lurker first time poster woot woot.

I was doing a write up on 1491 the other day and my son turned my pc off :banghead:

Based on Supreme court cases here in Washington along with multiple other states and the US Supreme court the initiative violates the 2A 4A 5A and 14A. I wish I had the court cases to show it because I had 10 of them them and was writing a nice article about it.

I think if the people pass this it will only be a matter of time before it goes before our Supreme court and they will strike portions of the law down.

With that being said I think we really need to change how Washington initiatives work the fact that only a handful of people could attempt to take away the rights of the majority is crazy.
Washington should not require a certain percentage of the voter population but a percentage of all Washington residents along with a way to have individuals counter the initiatives via signatures from people that oppose it.

welcome back roderick as five years between postings is a long time

sorry to hear your data was lost, but if you haven't cleared your browser history, you should be able to retreive the urls of the the data so you could provide them to members along with your commentary.

looking forward to future posts...

ipse

solus said:

welcome back roderick as five years between postings is a long time

sorry to hear your data was lost, but if you haven't cleared your browser history, you should be able to retreive the urls of the the data so you could provide them to members along with your commentary.

looking forward to future posts...

ipse

Click to expand...

Yeah I checked my browser history but I browse with a Private browser. I will see if I cant find them this weekend.
I need to get to one of our OC meetups I am right in Bellevue so it should be easy to make it to some of them.

Cause and Effect

Following is a link to every county newspaper in the State. https://www.sos.wa.gov/library/wa_newspapers.aspx

A letter to the editor may not educate every voter but it will likely get folks thinking about what they otherwise might not read until it shows up on the ballot or voter pamphlet.

Most of these are opinion columns and are generally restricted to 200 to 250 words.

Example:

Vote No on I- 1491

A noble gesture for removing firearms from mentally ill may result in the terrible use of the law to deprive citizens of their rights.
This law would allow a court to remove the rights of a citizen by way of an ex-parte order of the court.
Federal law states you may not purchase firearms or ammunition if you have such an order against you notwithstanding the fact you must prove you are innocent of.
You may not even know you have an order against you until 14 days after the court orders it.
The penalty for abusing the law is a gross misdemeanor........
...
Anyway you get the idea.


~Whitney

NavyLCDR said:

There is a way for the opposition to counter an initiative. Vote NO on the ballot it's on. The problem is that the average voter is a lemming that is going to vote the way they have drilled into their heads by the advertising campaigns of the side with the most money to throw at it.

Click to expand...

Yeah especially they word it correct on the ballot as "Extreme risk protection order"
Most people wont know wtf that is and will vote yes on it.

Whitney said:

Following is a link to every county newspaper in the State. https://www.sos.wa.gov/library/wa_newspapers.aspx

A letter to the editor may not educate every voter but it will likely get folks thinking about what they otherwise might not read until it shows up on the ballot or voter pamphlet.

Most of these are opinion columns and are generally restricted to 200 to 250 words.

Example:

Vote No on I- 1491

A noble gesture for removing firearms from mentally ill may result in the terrible use of the law to deprive citizens of their rights.
This law would allow a court to remove the rights of a citizen by way of an ex-parte order of the court.
Federal law states you may not purchase firearms or ammunition if you have such an order against you notwithstanding the fact you must prove you are innocent of.
You may not even know you have an order against you until 14 days after the court orders it.
The penalty for abusing the law is a gross misdemeanor........
...
Anyway you get the idea.


~Whitney

Click to expand...

Great idea. However, just because you write a "letter to the editor" doesn't mean it will make it past the editor's desk and get printed. If YOUR opinion is drastically different than the political leaning of the paper and it's staff it will just get "spiked".

We may have a "Free Press" in this country but it's only "Free" as long as it's printing IT'S OPINION.

Freedom1Man said:

A warrant is not a conviction.
This will be abused if passed.

Click to expand...

Likely.

NavyLCDR said:

Want an example of a false claim? During my divorce my ex-wife attempted to get the judge to enter a protection order against me which would have stripped away my firearms' rights and affected my military career. Luckily, in this one instance during my divorce fight the judge exercised a tiny bit of common sense and told her "I don't really think a protection order is required mostly due to the fact that you now live in Wyoming and your husband lives 1,300 miles away in Washington state."

Click to expand...

What the judge didn't mention is that her request, if granted, would have created a myriad of jurisdictional problems for the WA court.

Freedom1Man said:

She had gone to Maryland, I was served in Washington on a Friday, was expected to appear in court in Maryland that coming Monday. The judge granded the protection order against me saying that I could easily afford to go chase down and harm my, at that time, wife in Maryland. I was served with the order while at work. The police never even ASKED about my owning guns. And the order did not seem to affect the NICS either. I didn't make it to the hearing due to not having the time, money, nor the inclination to lose my job to take a trip to Maryland without notice.

But, how can an order from another state, that you were not living in when the order was created, affect your rights in another state?

Click to expand...

Probably can't (but, not impossible -- it's very fact-specific). Again, serious jurisdictional issues are implicated.

Freedom1Man said:

So, what this law would need is a liability rider. Anyone who makes any false claim should be liable for not less than, 100k per individual that a complaint has harmed and not less than 25k per day of lost rights paid to the injured party.
The judge should lose their place on the bench for any bad revocation and any police officers making false/bad claims should lose their job, be black listed, and everything that is even remotely owned by the officer should go to the injured party.

Click to expand...

WRT LEO, it could easily create 1983 liability. Sadly, the judge would be off the hook because you simply cannot sue a judge for acting in his/her judicial capacity.

OC for ME said:

Let me get this straight, and this concept is not new for WA, subjective evaluations are driving this obvious end-run around our enumerated rights? 2A, 4A, and 5A. Pfft...no penalty whatsoever.See...no penalty It is unfortunate that many WA citizens hold individual liberty in such low regard.

Click to expand...

Not to mention the greater protections afforded by the WA Const.

NavyLCDR said:

I believe that Freedom1man would disagree with you having been initially convicted of carrying a firearm in violation of RCW 9.41.300 (2)(b) because, according to the judge that convicted him, possessing a CPL was not enough to be exempted by 9.41.300 (2)(b)(i) which states that persons possessing a CPL are exempt from (2)(b). These are the same judges that the petitions for protection orders are going to be brought to.

Federal law. 18 USC 922 (g)(8):

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
(8) who is subject to a court order that— (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate;

(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and

(C) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury;
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

Click to expand...

The process to enforce a state court order from state A in state B via Fed. law is rather lengthy and difficult (frequently impossible -- but certainly expen$ive). A better route would be via an attempt under state A's long-arm statute. But, that is also very difficult (or unlikely) because of jurisdictional issues. Moreover, while the order could be issued in the other state, violation of it is probably not an extraditable offense (unless violence was involved), and you might only be on the hook if you enter the state where the PO was entered. As you can see, these issues are very fact-specific and quickly become complex.

Freedom1Man said:

This bill would be a violation of the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments of the bill of rights

Click to expand...

And several WA Const. articles, which offer greater protections.

roderick said:

<snip>
...
With that being said I think we really need to change how Washington initiatives work the fact that only a handful of people could attempt to take away the rights of the majority is crazy...

Click to expand...

No one can take away any right you have. They can try to suppress it (by passing laws is one way) ... but you should not let them.

amlevin said:

Go read through the news archives for the last few years and count the number of times family members have BEGGED law enforcement and the courts to take firearms away from mentally ill family members.

One case that comes to mind is the Cafe Racer shooting.

Even if family members see someone spiraling out of control like Ian Stawicki was, there was no mechanism to disarm him before the inevitable occurred. Same with law enforcement when they come in contact with the same situations.

A judge still has to be convinced that the person is a danger to himself and society and we shouldn't all be to quick to believe they are all fools. Yes, the request can be made to the court "ex-parte" because in the cases under discussion, the people often too mentally ill to participate and the danger is believed to be imminent.

Click to expand...

I can see a problem right away. My mother is staunchly anti-gun and anti-carry. Her knee jerk response to seeing an open carrier is to dial 911. I conceal when out and about with her out of consideration of the fact that she is completely TERRIFIED, to the point it counts as a clinical phobia, of even police being armed around her. If she did see me carrying, odds are she would petition a court to remove my guns, since she truly believes the propaganda about guns in the home being more dangerous to the owner than any possible intruder.

I am not a danger to myself or to any person that is not menacing me with a dangerous weapon (and I'm a threat to that sort of person even when unarmed). It wouldn't even slow my mother down since in her world, guns are demonic talismans that exist solely to murder people of their own volition.

The "roommates from the past 12 months" thing is very disturbing.

Imagine going to college and you are in a dorm assigned to a room with an anti-gun idiot who finds out 11 months after you graduate that you are a gun owner.