Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: How would 1997's I-676 fare today?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    I came across a reference to a 1997 Washington State Initiative that would have resulted in some of the strictest gun control laws in the country.

    http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections.../text/i676.pdf

    It went down in flames, 71% to 29%. It lost in every single country in the state.

    http://www.uselectionatlas.org/WIKI/...Initiative_676
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...19/ai_20585263

    Reading the text of the initiative, and some contemporary information about it (for example, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/july-dec97/guns_11-4.html)... supporters used every trick out of the liberal playbook. Emotional nonsense, "it's for the children" etc etc. Big money such as Bill Gates supported it. Yet it still failed.

    In some ways, it's rather amazing, ain't it? Even by 1997, the Berkeley-style leftists were consolidating power in Seattle, and yet I-676 went down hard.

    Would the same thing happen today? Scary -- we could have gone from one of the most favorable gun situations in the nation to one with the least. Will the liberals be emboldened try again soon?

  2. #2
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Probably wouldn't stand a constitutional challenge then or now. "Shall not be impaired" is pretty basic.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Probably wouldn't stand a constitutional challenge then or now. "Shall not be impaired" is pretty basic.
    As much as "shall not infringe"? Riiiiiight

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Washington's courts have tended to uphold the higher level of plainly spelled out rights in our constitution.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    Constitutionality aside, I believe that similar initiatives would go down in flames. In support of this, look at recent posts about the rise in CPL applications and increased number of people in gunshops purchasing their first firearm. Granted it's anecdotal, but that's my take.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Constitutionality aside, I believe that similar initiatives would go down in flames. In support of this, look at recent posts about the rise in CPL applications and increased number of people in gunshops purchasing their first firearm. Granted it's anecdotal, but that's my take.
    Good point -- that might be the best indicator indeed.

  7. #7
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    Our state constitution is worded more plainly and in some ways better than the 2nd amendment when it addresses firearms rights.

    "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."

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyR...nstitution.htm

    Itclearly states that bearing arms in self-defense is an individual right, rather than the more indirectly worded 2nd amendment. (Although thanks to DC vs HellerSCOTUS issued an opinion that seta very clear precedent for the individual right to bear arms.)

    Furthermore, CPL's in our state are more popular now than ever. According to the HeraldNet in Everett, "License holders jumped from about 179,000 to 258,000, 43 percent, between 2003 and 2007. The state Department of Licensing says permit applications in Kitsap County jumped from 1,587 in 2004 to 3,339 in 2007." http://www.heraldnet.com/article/200...WS03/808319975

Posting Permissions

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