• 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.

Pederson supporting action to take an intiative to the voters on gun control

Alpine

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Idaho
I hope they copy and paste HB1588 into initiative form and try to vote on that, it should be easy to defeat it when you explain to people it's a backdoor ban on private sales since the two ways to get a BG listed in it are functionally impossible or at least highly unlikely to occur.
 

jt59

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
1,005
Location
Central South Sound
I hope they copy and paste HB1588 into initiative form and try to vote on that, it should be easy to defeat it when you explain to people it's a backdoor ban on private sales since the two ways to get a BG listed in it are functionally impossible or at least highly unlikely to occur.

I don't think that they want to get mired down in details....but you're right, here's an example

This is something forwarded to me about the bills at the national level....

The "most popular" parts of the proposed Senate gun control bill (background checks) may sound like a "reasonable" idea at first but is more restrictive than anyone anticipated and will have significant unintended consequences.

Common activities that we take for granted will become federal crimes.

Here are a few examples of the restrictions in the federal bill that ultimately failed:

EXAMPLE #1
Loaning your buddy a shotgun for a duck hunting trip will be considered a transfer. If the following requirements are not met, YOU HAVE BOTH COMMITTED A FEDERAL CRIME.

1. He must have already purchased his hunting license
2. Season is already open (and will not close before he returns it)
3. He cannot travel with the firearm through a county where season is not yet open or any area where hunting is prohibited and certainly not across a state line.

He CANNOT stop by your house on the day before season opens, pick up the shot gun, go to the sporting goods store to buy a license and shells then drive out to the hunting lease. In this scenario, YOU BOTH WOULD HAVE COMMITTED MULTIPLE FEDERAL CRIMES, YOUR WEAPONS WILL BE FORFEITED AND YOU WILL LOOSE YOUR RIGHT TO BUY OR OWN A FIREARM.

EXAMPLE #2

It appears that only you may relocate your weapons. If your weapon leaves your home without you, the new legislation considers it a transfer of possession. ALL transfers require going through a firearms dealer, paying the transfer fee and a background check for the transferee.

Putting the weapon, even temporarily in someone else's possession, requires a transfer through a dealer. There is no exception for putting them in a friend's truck while moving to your new house or packing them unloaded, locked in a gunsafe into a moving truck.

Any scenario in which your weapon leaves your home without you is considered a transfer. Failure to properly transfer the weapon is a federal crime which can result in a prison term AND WILL RESULT IN THE FORFEITURE OF YOUR WEAPON.

In the scenario above, your buddy's truck was used to commit a federal crime and WILL BE CONFISCATED just like with current Fish and Game violations.

EXAMPLE #3

Infractions as above which involve 2 guns of any type are considered weapons trafficking. You will be prosecuted under the same federal laws as a terrorist arms dealer.

EXAMPLE #4

Any of the infractions above (or hundreds of other routine scenarios) may result in federal charges, confiscation of ALL your weapons and being prohibited, like all felons, from ever owning a weapon again.

Please read the text of the bill yourself. Most of it is boring legalese but the sections on transfers and trafficking are critical.

Take a minute to think about all the routine activities like those above that will make you a federal criminal and result in prison time plus the confiscation of your weapons and other property.

See Section 122 "Firearms Transfers".
 
Last edited:

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
I did an Examiner piece on this and noted in the 2nd paragraph that there is an alternate initiative also in the works, starting on another local gun forum in Washington.

Anti-gunners will launch gun control initiative campaign
http://www.examiner.com/article/ant...n-control-initiative-campaign?cid=db_articles


Now there seems to be a bit of confusion, and we won't know for sure until after the Monday press conference....this may be an initiative to the legislature to do something in 2014. If it passes, then it will be up to us to make the final statute say what we want it to say.

If it is just an initiative to the people like 676...then we have a real fight on our hands..
 

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
to what end? how would anything like this (post signature) affect anything save, validation of signatures?


Signers of the initiative can be exposed as opposed to the basic human right of self defense. This exposition can be leveraged against them, either to attempt to change their view and vote, or to ridicule them, if it comes to that.

That's what the gays did.

It can also be used in retaliation. The gays were more than happy to expose people for ridicule and scorn - I say we should to. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Signers of the initiative can be exposed as opposed to the basic human right of self defense. This exposition can be leveraged against them, either to attempt to change their view and vote, or to ridicule them, if it comes to that.

That's what the gays did.

It can also be used in retaliation. The gays were more than happy to expose people for ridicule and scorn - I say we should to. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.[/COLOR]

Didn't the homosexuals lose in their marriage proposal?
 

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
Didn't the homosexuals lose in their marriage proposal?


That's not the point. Exposing people as being anti-rights is a shrewd political tactic. One that we might use. I'd do it myself, but I don't have the money or programming skill to start such a web page.
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
The same sex marriage issue from my understanding would be Constitutional either allowed or denied as it is not covered by the Constitution and there for goes to the State or the people to create law. I think we will be seeing soon in June 2013 from SCOTUS that California Law prohibiting same sex marriage will be affirmed.

How an initiative will fair concerning The Right To Keep and Bear Arms I think would require a Constitutional Amendment both in the State and Federal Government depending upon the wording though a harder road traveled.
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
I'll be writing about this at Examiner and in The Gun Mag, and I think we ought to fire up the old WeCARE organization to start raising campaign money to fight these jerks,.
I'll be talking to Joe Waldron about this later in the week at the NRA gathering in Houston.
Anybody else going down for that?


‘Our rights are not for sale’ say fired-up gun owners

Promises of a big bucks politicalcampaign to force Washington lawmakers to adopt a “universal background check”law, with threats of an initiative if they don’t, have fired up Evergreen Stategun owners since Monday’s press conference by several Seattle religiousactivists.

http://www.examiner.com/article/our-rights-are-not-for-sale-say-fired-up-gun-owners?cid=db_articles
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
No. The right to marry who you want and keep the government from excluding people became law of the state.

no, the right to marry someone of the same sex became law, you still can't marry a first cousin in WA, still can't marry a sibling, or multiple people....

the government still actively excludes people.... just made it acceptable for the "right" group of people....
 

jt59

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
1,005
Location
Central South Sound
Eight posts later...

Wow,

That didn't take long...we've gone from an extended session, the Gov's call to revisit taxes and gun controls to a debate on Gay marrige.....

You guys are so cool!
 
Last edited:
Top