Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 83

Thread: Legislature Back In Session, Here We Go... New Gun Laws

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    250

    Post imported post

    We've gotta participate, and send letters, emails, and testify in committee hearings. Don't let this slide people.....

    SB 6304:

    Allowing institutions of higher education to adopt rules regulating firearms on campus. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...&year=2008

    HB 1026 :

    Regulating the sale of firearms at gun shows and events.
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...&year=2008

    HB 1014:

    Encouraging safe storage of firearms. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...&year=2008

    I am soooooo sick of this "Nanny State" mentality.




  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    6304 is a little odd. The legislature has already given that authority to the universities by allowing them to write their own WACs. I wonder if they are worried about a court challenge under preemption.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    384

    Post imported post

    Wrote my representatives about this, we'll see how they respond.

    I just wrote them that I'm against the other 2, but for 6304 I wrote this:


    Hello,

    Please be advised that not only am I against senate bill 6304, I have to point out the sheer absurdity involved in a bill of this nature.

    The bill suggests that the legislation has determined that new rules are necessary to regulate firearms on college campuses due to recent events. Did it ever occur to our legislature that the 'recent events' on college campuses involving illegal discharge of a firearm, harm to others, even deaths, were already illegal?

    Banning guns only takes them away from law abiding citizens. As a voter, I didn't elect you folks to pass laws banning things in 6 different ways. Enforce the law as it exists now and stop trying to pass new laws every time a problem is encountered!

    Best regards,
    Andrew
    Not that they will actually read my mail or anything, but at least I wrote.

  4. #4
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684

    Post imported post

    I don't know if it's too late to push these this year...

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/6633.html

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/3849.html

    Let's get some legislation that leans our way in there, rather than just constantly fighting those who want to further infringe our rights having all the action!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    John Hardin wrote:
    I don't know if it's too late to push these this year...

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/6633.html

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/3849.html

    Let's get some legislation that leans our way in there, rather than just constantly fighting those who want to further infringe our rights have all the action!
    We actually have over the past few years, but nothing ever gets done with it given the majority situation.

    I asked my rep to write legislation requiring that the state send out a renewal notice for CPPs. He did and they didn't act on it because it was "firearms" legislation.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    250

    Post imported post

    Sent off some emails. I "Encourage" everyone to do this. We NEED to be on top of this. It's easy to send an email. Just click on the sponsors name on these bills, and it's all automated.

    As an example, here are the sponsors of SB6304

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/M...mp;District=36

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/M...mp;District=21

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/M...amp;District=1

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/M...mp;District=32

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/M...mp;District=34

    I also believe that when/if it gets into the committee, those legislators are more important in getting your voice to. So be on the lookout of the committees that will be hearing these bills. I will update, as well.....

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Here is my response.

    Code:
    I would like to voice my opinion against SB6304. SB6304 has supposedly been introduced to protect the citizens of Washington. The fact of the matter is that this bill may likely lead to disaster. In the WAC’s for almost every center for higher education there are items that restricts the carrying of a firearm by students. Presently the WAC’s do not prevent a non-student visiting the campuses from carrying a firearm. This bill will strip these people of their constitutionally preserved right to bear arms. I do understand that there may be a need for additional protection at college campuses but I truly do not believe that restricting firearms completely is the correct avenue for this. There has been a lot of discussion since the Virginia Tech tragedy about banning firearms on college campuses. Virginia had regulations banning firearm carrying during the time that this incident happened. The laws and regulations did nothing to stop the violence. Columbine is the same in the sense that the laws in place that restricted firearms on the school campus were meaningless to the perpetrators. It has been seen time and time again that legislation that prevents people from defending themselves only results in more deaths when an incident occurs. The only people that follow these types of legislation are lawful firearm owners. These people will abide by the laws that leave them vulnerable and defenseless to the people that disregard laws and human life.
    
     I strongly urge you to oppose SB6304 and urge you to enact bills that would truly help make our colleges a safer learning environment. Bills that would provide more funding to the college police departments and security departments or to offer free classes/seminars to teach staff and students how to spot these threats and take the appropriate actions before violence can occur, I think, would be a better starting point than to create laws that the criminals have already shown in the past that they will disregard.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    222

    Post imported post

    That's a well-crafted reply that depicts those of us who choose to carry as rational and intelligent. Well done!

    One of the issues that would have to be considered if higher ed institutions are allowed to ban firearms is that public thoroughfares transverse their properties. How are armed citizens supposed to use public roads that run through a campus? This is part of the reason for the exemptions in the Gun Free Schools Act, is to allow lawful possession as one passes through or has legitimate business on a K-12 campus.

    On a related note, there is proposed legislation that will make posession of a firearm by a student on campus a Class C felony unless it is unloaded and locked in a vehicle (which would only be a Gross Misdemeanor). House bill 3905, I believe. As stated by joerocket in his letter, the existing laws don't work, so why do legislators think a new law will be any different? Possession of a handgun by a minor is already a Class C felony.

    But, here's one more thing to consider . . . what happened to equal protection of the law? If 3905 became law, an 18 year old student (citizen) would be guilty of a crime if he had an unloaded rifle in his vehicle, but an 18 year old non-student would not be guilty of a crime. What happened to the level playing field that "all men are created equal?"

    I'm for finding a legislator that will sponsor a bill to change the wording of RCW such that would pre-empt all cities, municipalies, and governmental sub-divisions from passing any law, code, or policy that is more restritive than state law on firearms. Our state constitution is clear that the right to self-defense shall not be infringed, which is exactly what the legislators are trying to do every time they restrict where we can carry.

    By the way, 3905 would also make it a gross misdemeanor to possess a stun gun, Tazer, or pepper sprayon school property -- even in the parking lot. I predict they would arrest a lot of little old ladies at the Friday night football game if they did a purse check!


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Do you have a link for HB3905? I can't seem to find it listed.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    222

    Post imported post

    I have it as a PDF (don't ask -- I'm a covert operative!)



    Attached Files Attached Files

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    113

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    Here is my response.

    Code:
    I would like to voice my opinion against SB6304. SB6304 has supposedly been introduced to protect the citizens of Washington. The fact of the matter is that this bill may likely lead to disaster. In the WAC’s for almost every center for higher education there are items that restricts the carrying of a firearm by students. Presently the WAC’s do not prevent a non-student visiting the campuses from carrying a firearm. This bill will strip these people of their constitutionally preserved right to bear arms. I do understand that there may be a need for additional protection at college campuses but I truly do not believe that restricting firearms completely is the correct avenue for this. There has been a lot of discussion since the Virginia Tech tragedy about banning firearms on college campuses. Virginia had regulations banning firearm carrying during the time that this incident happened. The laws and regulations did nothing to stop the violence. Columbine is the same in the sense that the laws in place that restricted firearms on the school campus were meaningless to the perpetrators. It has been seen time and time again that legislation that prevents people from defending themselves only results in more deaths when an incident occurs. The only people that follow these types of legislation are lawful firearm owners. These people will abide by the laws that leave them vulnerable and defenseless to the people that disregard laws and human life.
    
     I strongly urge you to oppose SB6304 and urge you to enact bills that would truly help make our colleges a safer learning environment. Bills that would provide more funding to the college police departments and security departments or to offer free classes/seminars to teach staff and students how to spot these threats and take the appropriate actions before violence can occur, I think, would be a better starting point than to create laws that the criminals have already shown in the past that they will disregard.

    Sent to my reps (District 1)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    XD45PlusP wrote:
    I am soooooo sick of this "Nanny State" mentality.

    what i've always found as funny (agree with it or not). is that these same people that want to "nerf' the world, are also pushing evolution (natural selection) on high school students.

    you think darwin would like the idea of making everything safe to the lowest common denominator?

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645

    Post imported post

    At this point it doeslittle good to write to your REP's to oppose Senate Bills, and no good to write to your State Senator to oppose House Bills. That time may come but it's not now. The goal is to kill the bills before they get that far.

    At this point, when writingto support or opposesenate bills write to your State Senator, and when writing about House Bills write to your District Rep.

    An exception to above is if you use the Web Form on the Legislatures web page. One advantage of using this form is that it tallies the responses in to oppose and support. That way you are at least tallied, even if they never read your email


  14. #14
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684

    Post imported post

    Right Wing Wacko wrote:
    At this point it doeslittle good to write to your REP's to oppose Senate Bills, and no good to write to your State Senator to oppose House Bills. That time may come but it's not now. The goal is to kill the bills before they get that far.

    At this point, when writingto support or opposesenate bills write to your State Senator, and when writing about House Bills write to your District Rep.

    An exception to above is if you use the Web Form on the Legislatures web page. One advantage of using this form is that it tallies the responses in to oppose and support. That way you are at least tallied, even if they never read your email
    I always CC all of them, so that they all have visibility to the opinions of those they represent.

    Thanks for the heads-up about the web form, I wasn't aware that they tallied those. We should all post comments there as well as writing/faxing letters.

    Edited to add: RWW, can you post links to those pages so that we don't have to go hunting?

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    384

    Post imported post

    So I actually got a reply back from what appears to be a real legislator and not a staffer.

    Here's what I wrote; I encourage feedback if I'm out of line. Yes, the formatting looks like crap here. Hopefully it's a bit more readable in the format I sent her.





    Liz,

    First, I want to express my thanks to you for your response and actual dialog. Even if we never end up seeing eye to eye on this, the fact that you actually bothered to ask for a suggestion instead of sending me a cut and paste response that completely ignores my concerns speaks volumes to me.
    To address your question, you asked me for my thoughts on how we can reduce the number of accidental shootings each year, and I have taken what I believe to be a problem solving approach to offer a solution.
    First, let's define the problem.
    I did some research on the problem (1) and found that there were an average of 57.5 firearm deaths per year in Washington from 1999-2004, totaling 287. These tragic deaths were largely concentrated in the 15-19 year old age group as you can see if you use the CDC reporting tool.
    The above report was run using the data for 0-19 year olds on all firearm related deaths. If you filter only on unintentional deaths, the number drops significantly (Homicide deaths account for 112 of those deaths, while suicides account for 149 of those deaths). The conclusion that I have drawn from this data is that when we refer to accidental shootings, the actual number is far smaller than some suggest, at a total of 17 accidental shootings over 5 years. Ultimately, that means there are 3.4 accidental shootings per year that result in the death of children.
    While this is certainly tragic, the problem is clearly overstated to begin with.
    The next problem with this legislation is that it assumes the accidental firearms related deaths were perpetrated by children. The CDC offers no statistics (at least, that I could find) on the age group of those who actually committed these accidental killings.

    As a result, we have no conclusive evidence that I can find that any significant percentage of these killings were committed by a child. However, for the sake of discussion and common sense, I will admit that it's very likely that at least some of them were, simply because we all hear the occasional tragic story in the news about the little boy who killed his friend by playing with dad's .22 rifle or other such stories.
    This bill attempts to give law enforcement the opportunity to bring irresponsible parents to justice by charging them with reckless endangerment or other such crimes if they do not store their firearms in a 'safe' manner. However, it will not prevent deaths, simply because enforcement of this bill from a prevention stance would require police to inspect firearm owners’ homes on a regular basis. I hope it's safe to say that this is a solution that none of us want!

    I also submit that a firearms-owning parent who lacked the responsibility to teach their children the rules of firearms safety and instill a respect in their children for firearms will also be irresponsible enough to not secure their firearms anyway, whether there is a law or not, especially as it is unenforceable until after a tragic event occurs.
    Now that I have made my case for why this bill will not lower firearms related deaths, I do have a potential solution for you to consider.
    Why not teach firearms safety in schools? I was lucky enough personally that my father instilled a deep respect for firearms when I was 5 with a trip to the woods, a stern lecture on firearms safety, a lesson on how guns work, and an object lesson both in what a bullet does to its target, and also what it's like to shoot one. Obviously it doesn't need to be a trip to the woods in school, but a firearms safety class is hardly a bad idea nonetheless. I think it's pragmatic to assume that some parents will object to their children participating in such a class, and that's their choice, but such parents probably don't own firearms, so it's really not an issue.

    In summary, instead of passing a law that can't be enforced in a preventative fashion with the intention of lowering accidental deaths, let's pass legislation that doesn't tell people what to do in their homes and instead gives them options that allow their children to receive a proper education in firearms safety, and build the deep respect for firearms that precludes the kind of horseplay that results in children dying.
    I do apologize for making this so long, but I truly appreciate and thank you for actually considering the suggestions of your constituents.
    Best regards,
    Andrew Brown


    (1) http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html


    From: "Loomis, Rep. Liz" <------------removed to stop spam>
    Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 3:54 PM
    To: removed to stop spam
    Subject: RE: I am against HB 1014


    Mr. Brown,

    Thanks for contacting my office. How do you suggest we cut down on the
    number of accidental shootings each year? I would like to know your
    thoughts.

    Thank you for contacting my office,

    LIZ LOOMIS
    State Representative
    44th Legislative District
    PO Box 40600
    Olympia, WA 98504-0600
    (360) 786-7892

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    332

    Post imported post

    Holy crap! Well done!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    HB 3905 letter http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=d9hbdsz_18hknpnjcz

    HB 1014 letter http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=d9hbdsz_20fdg6prgz

    SB 6304 letter http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=d9hbdsz_22xj34r8cz

    Here are two of my letters. Managed to dump the HB 1026 prior to posting it by accident. Feel free to plagiarize. You will notice that I certainly did. I don't think you need a google account to access these but I could be wrong. Mailed these off today to my two legislators. I will get to my senator tomorrow.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    Check out the wording on HB1026
    This bill would define a gun show as a place where three or more people gather to display or sell firearms, or where ten or more guns are offered for transfer. This is so ridiculously restrictive that someone selling off a portion of their collection would qualify as a gun show, even if they were in their house with a potential buyer of one of the firearms. Two people stopping by the house of a seller because one of them saw an ad in the paper for a firearm for sale becomes a gun show.


  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    6

    Post imported post

    HB1026 is sponsored by both of my representatives. I'm sending them a letter, and informing them (yet again) that I am watching their votes and will remember come election time.This "feel good" legislation is a waste of time since itonly adds extra charges to criminal prosecution AFTER THE FACT! BTW, I'm still trying to digest all the changes, but as an FFL03 holder how would this effect me? It appears that if I sell too many firearms, or legally transfer to a non-licensee at a "gun show" I would have to pay for a background check! Sincemy license is not a business, I think it really puts me in a grey area...



    Gama





  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    North of Seattlle, South of Canada, Washington, USA
    Posts
    173

    Post imported post

    I have lost track how many times that as a cop and state certified firearms instructor, I have sent letters to all the politicos against the bills. I had one legislator last year, some hosehead frm down south, actually get stupid with me on an e-mail (I remember posting it over at the FalFiles).

    I once had Adam Kline tell me I was a dangerous man who didn't deserve to be a cop. All because I opposed a bill.

    Politicians, like dog crap, need to be often cleaned up and thrown out.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645

    Post imported post

    I gota response today from Kirk Pearson (R-39)
    Dear Paul

    Thank you for your message regarding SB 6304.

    Like you I am a strong supporter of our second amendment, and I will not support any new gun control bills.

    Sincearly

    Kirk Pearson
    I went to High School with Kirk. He's one of the good guys.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    Right Wing Wacko wrote:
    I gota response today from Kirk Pearson (R-39)
    Dear Paul

    Thank you for your message regarding SB 6304.

    Like you I am a strong supporter of our second amendment, and I will not support any new gun control bills.

    Sincearly

    Kirk Pearson
    I went to High School with Kirk. He's one of the good guys.
    He's that old, huh? LOL

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    250

    Post imported post

    SB 6304:

    Scheduled for public hearing in the Senate Committee on Higher Education Jan24th at 10:00 AM

    Here are the Committee members. Please email them....

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/HIE/Members.htm

    I noticed that one of them (Shin) whom is on the committee, is also a sponsor of this bill. Can you say "Conflict Of Interest"???



  24. #24
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    XD45PlusP wrote:
    SB 6304:

    Scheduled for public hearing in the Senate Committee on Higher Education Jan24th at 10:00 AM

    Here are the Committee members. Please email them....

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/HIE/Members.htm

    I noticed that one of them (Shin) whom is on the committee, is also a sponsor of this bill. Can you say "Conflict Of Interest"???

    SONOFABITCH!!!! That jackhole is from my district. GRRR!!!... I think I may have gone to high school with his son. I'll see where I can get withthis...
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    XD45PlusP wrote:
    SB 6304:

    Scheduled for public hearing in the Senate Committee on Higher Education Jan24th at 10:00 AM

    Here are the Committee members. Please email them....

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/HIE/Members.htm

    I noticed that one of them (Shin) whom is on the committee, is also a sponsor of this bill. Can you say "Conflict Of Interest"???

    That's not really the definition of conflict of interest. A conflict of interest would be if he had some sort of financial stake in the passage of the bill. Just being on the committee doesn't mean much. Everyone is on several committees.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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