Would you financially support the establishment of a Washington State group?

Metalhead47 said:

As long as I get a sticker. Gotta have a sticker. Just tell me where to send the check. Won't be a big check, but should cover the cost of the sticker.



And like Tomas said, I'd like to see an organization that forwards ALL manner of carry: open, concealed, and the always overlooked duck-taped-to-the-forehead. That widens the potential member base considerably, and might help change some hearts & minds in the CC crowd who don't like us.

Click to expand...

100% agree, saved me a lot of typing.

It's gotta be a COOL sticker! And them I'm in for a few bucks.

amlevin said:

My vote is a conditional Yes. Before any money is collected there is work to be done. Someone has to take care of the necessary paperwork to form a Non-Profit, and a "Mission Statement" needs to be established.

It should be clear how "officers" are selected and how the funds collected are to be spent.

If the organization is to be "informational" in scope, who controls the message?

If it is to be a Legal Defense Fund, who will decide which cases have merit? Which Attorneys will be used?

Lots of questions to be answered and I'm sure there are many more.

Click to expand...

Of course...all that will be sorted out. This is just a first step to see if there is enough support to even start the process.

All the rest...

will be discovered later, over the course of some time.

While I personally expect the answer to be yes and I would like to see a formal organization with some resources we need to take this through the proper steps.

All the details we will follow up with at a later time.

nick

jt59 said:

Of course...all that will be sorted out. This is just a first step to see if there is enough support to even start the process.

Click to expand...

It is my belief that there might be more support if there was at least a draft of what the "organization" would be all about. The more it tries to do, the more expensive. Expense will dictate not only a lot of peoples desire to form an organization, but their ability to support it.

We don't want to follow Nancy Pelosi's lead by suggesting we "vote for it so we can find out what's in it".

Final Format? I don't see the need yet, just the outline of what it might or should look like.

amlevin said:

It is my belief that there might be more support if there was at least a draft of what the "organization" would be all about. The more it tries to do, the more expensive. Expense will dictate not only a lot of peoples desire to form an organization, but their ability to support it.

We don't want to follow Nancy Pelosi's lead by suggesting we "vote for it so we can find out what's in it".

Final Format? I don't see the need yet, just the outline of what it might or should look like.

Click to expand...

After the poll, there will be some meetings to see what people want an organization to do and the coresponding costs.

One step at a time, we just want to guage interest.

I voted no.

I'd rather see an organization (and not that FUDD based WAC) that supports all gun rights.

That advances OC, seeks to get rid of the permit for CCing, legalize machine gun transfers, legalizes SBR and SBS, legalizes the use of noise supressors, et cetera.

Really they key is, imho, organizing effective communication with elected officials, getting people to show up and press the politicians flesh, write letters, phone calls, etc. All things that can be done via tech/internet based tools for virtually no cost at all.

Dave_pro2a said:

I voted no.

I'd rather see an organization (and not that FUDD based WAC) that supports all gun rights.

That advances OC, seeks to get rid of the permit for CCing, legalize machine gun transfers, legalizes SBR and SBS, legalizes the use of noise supressors, et cetera.

Really they key is, imho, organizing effective communication with elected officials, getting people to show up and press the politicians flesh, write letters, phone calls, etc. All things that can be done via tech/internet based tools for virtually no cost at all.

Click to expand...

You should have voted YES...all that you state can go on the list for discussion...the statement was purposefully broad: "carry related issues that are specific and important to us "all" under our State Constitution"

....this should be a "both/and" scenario of needs...not an "either/or"

Stretch said:

Maybe we can get some reference from Nik, Wisconsin Carry Chairman, on how they established their organization.

This is about our right to carry, in any legal manner. Wisconsin has a hot line, and some amount of a legal team or a group of lawyers whom believe in our 2A rights as well as our 4A rights as well. I don't see any place where we are paying a member to be a spokesman, etc.

Stickers and T-shirts would be cool...

Click to expand...

Wisconsin Carry has existed for less than a year, but I believe our track record of success has been outstanding. We organized with the intend of actually doing something rather than just asking for donations with a promise "we'll help you out someday." Therefore we incorporated as a non-profit corporation. Our time spent on gun rights matters-- which is often considerable--- is unpaid volunteer work. We are able to get reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses, but I am positive that no Wisconsin Carry Board member has bothered to get reimbursed more than a fraction of what they could. Personally I have been reimbursed a grand total of $25-- for a table we bought at a political event and for which I paid cash. Not a penny for my travel, hotel, time lost from my "day job," or any other expenses. If you've followed recent news, you know we've had two very busy weeks following the citations given to 5 OCers in Madison. I have been interviewed on camera 3 times last week, on radio twice, and by newspapers so many times I quit counting. In between the more public happenings we get countless emails and phone calls regarding various situations around the state, questions on our merchandise, requests for help, and an occasional complaint or anonymous "you gun nuts suck" type of communication. So if you create "Washington Carry" just make sure that the people know what is in store for them. Despite the work, the it has been a very satisfying experience. We have had great results resolving many issues informally, whether it it clarification of or changing of business policies on allowing firearms, addressing issues of local preemption, and providing education to local governments, police and the public. Our successes have given us a large dedicated membership of hardworking individuals who do many things that WCI board members could not possibly do alone, e.g., organize or staff events, attend public meetings, hand out pamphlets at parades, and many other activities. Most importantly, many people have gotten the motivation and courage to actually exercise their freedom to OC. To me this is the most important activity anyone can do. There is little point in fighting for a freedom, if nobody is going to exercise that freedom.

My last thought for my brothers and sisters in Washington-- I tried to fight for gun rights as an individual for many years, with little progress to show. As part of an organized movement, we have accomplished a thousand times more in under a year, than I did on my own during 15 years or more. If you organize, the most important factor is not the particular design of the organization, it is the motivation to be a very accessible and active organization. Not one that simply collects dues and provides lip service, but one that gets involved and deals with issues as they happen. That is what has made Wisconsin Carry successful during it's short existence, and also why it has earned the respect it has been given. Good luck in Washington. Please check out website: wisconsincarry.org and feel free to contact any of the officers with your questions or comments.

jt59 said:

You should have voted YES...all that you state can go on the list for discussion...the statement was purposefully broad: "carry related issues that are specific and important to us "all" under our State Constitution"

....this should be a "both/and" scenario of needs...not an "either/or"

Click to expand...

The OP specifically stated "carry related issue." I can't see machine gun transfers or silencer use falling under that catagory.

::shrug:: just my opinion.

And the odds are good that anything you guys form will be better than what WAC does

Heck no! No way! not this side of hell!

We have done WAY too much already by simply a volunteer, last minute, online basis that "creating an orginazation" to "do whatever" is going to take a HELL OF A LOT LONGER by the time it goes through comittees and boards and wahtever the else have you not.

THIS particular meeting today would not have been possible if we had a beaurocratic comittee and all. I think that to even suggest the idea of making this HIGHLY effective and well organized group into a comittee and a board of trustees and all that other beaurocratic garbage would be a waste of precious time and resources that would SEVERLY hinder us and the message we are trying to portray.

We are not a bunch of constitutional law geeks (except for gogo :lol: ) and we do not need to be associated with anything OTHER THAN ordinary people.

Instead of wasting our money paying a FEW people to be "in charge: of something that doesn't even need somone in charge is ABSURD! Perhaps we could better spend our money by SUPPORTING those of us that have been wrong by "the system" Josh and Tom come to mind here.

Why not just stop the bickering and the "lets make everything formal just because" bull crap and put our money where it NEEDS to go!

Hey doc, tell us how you really feel

Count me in.

My Yes of support is conditional. The conditions are that it needs to be a volunteer organization. It needs to support ALL gun rights issues. The Wisconsin Carry group seems to have a pretty good start on the process.

From Wisconsin Carry's home page:

"Wisconsin Carry, Inc is a non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation and reclamation of the basic rights critical to a free society. Our organization believes in the founding principles of our country and our constitution: That all are created equal, that governments exist to protect the rights of individuals, and that governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. The Second Amendment of our Federal constitution explicitly affirms one of the limitless numbers of rights we enjoy as human beings. The right to keep and bear arms. In 1998 79% of the voters in the great state of Wisconsin voted Article 1 Section 25 into our state constitution. "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose". We believe that "Open-Carry" and "Conceal Carry" are choices to be made by law-abiding citizens based on what suits their needs best. Our mission is to preserve, advance and expand these basic rights which law-abiding citizens are entitled to have a practical ability to exercise."

When reading the above does anyone see why this "statement" could not be adopted here, of course making the necessary changes where State and State Constitution are mentioned?

One benefit that could arise from such an organization has been demonstrated by the Wisconsin group. THEY have filed a lawsuit on behalf of the "Madison 5". An organization can raise funds and provide the means to challenge those who feel they can harass and they will get away with it because a legal challenge is often beyond the means of an individual.

I still hold by my earlier point that MORE interest might be forthcoming if there was an outline of what the organization might look like. I would suggest that instead of reinventing the wheel, Wisconsin's lead be followed.

devildoc5-

I can appreciate your position but consider that in many cases, an organization is often more powerful than the sum of it's parts (members). For media, it gives a single point of contact and a unified message. For Law Enforcement, it makes them aware that they are subjected to organized scrutiny. For the general public, it shows that we are not a bunch of "far out right wing whacko's" but an organized group of citizens with a clear understanding of the laws that govern us all.

Shotgun's words are very telling: "we have accomplished a thousand times more in under a year, than I did on my own during 15 years or more.

Considering I will no longer pay dues to the NRA because of them only caring about getting more money instead of defending the 2A I'll be happy to shift those dues to something more local.

Especially if we could get a 501(c)(3) organization set up, either as part or in whole of the idea, corporate matching of donations would apply.

Tawnos said:

Especially if we could get a 501(c)(3) organization set up, either as part or in whole of the idea, corporate matching of donations would apply.

Click to expand...

WCI is not 501(c)(3) incorporated. I don't know all the reasons why, but that is what they said.

protias said:

WCI is not 501(c)(3) incorporated. I don't know all the reasons why, but that is what they said.

Click to expand...

It requires a certain amount to be paid to the government and a certain amount of paperwork, plus activities the charitable side can do are limited to the purview of a 501(c)(3). On the flip side, it lets people who have company matching for charitable donations use that. Hence, I have Microsoft help support the SAF

Tawnos said:

Especially if we could get a 501(c)(3) organization set up, either as part or in whole of the idea, corporate matching of donations would apply.

Click to expand...

This would be inclusive in the process....it allows the dues to be used toward the organizational goals....no taxes would be paid.

protias said:

WCI is not 501(c)(3) incorporated. I don't know all the reasons why, but that is what they said.

Click to expand...

There are a variety of non-profit status designations....some are for political activisim, others are for education and eligibility to recieve federal grant funding, others are social, but...without a letter of determination from the IRS, monies collected are liable to taxes, and individuals (board members) may be held liable. personally.

In a non-profit organization, with all the paperwork filed, there is a board, officers, financial accountability to members and the books are open to inspection. Money collected and not used for current year expenses, programs (think training events), are held over as "retained earnings"....and not taxed. Board members and officers are not eligible to recieve any compensation.