If Washington would pass or remove just ONE firearm law..

[Aaron1124]

imported post

killchain wrote:

Gray Peterson wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:

killchain wrote:

My pick for laws would be firearms can carried everywhere, even schools and the like. With or without a CPL is up for debate.

1000' rule is federal and has the interstate commerce clause in it. It does need to be done away with. How does picking your kids up while exercising 2A have anything to do with inter-state commerce.

Though not directly attacking the federal statute, it attacks the Wisconsin State Statute on 1000 foot school zones.

Wisconsin Carry Inc v. City of Milwaukee

This is the first suit to my knowledge in federal courts attacking the gun free school zones act using the 2A.

Well then, I change my recommendation to rewriting that federal law. I also am under the opinion that teachers or maybe a qualified person on campus should have access to firearms for defense. Think of how many school shootings would have been lessened or even stopped if a teacher could fight back?

Probably a lot. UFC fighter Frank Mir commented on that in this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5HLvMqEx9Y

 

[Moose51]

imported post

Above most, I would like to see the own/no-use suppressor thing cleared up

 

[Gray Peterson]

imported post

kschmadeka wrote:

Gray Peterson wrote:

RCW 9.41.070 needs to be amended to lower the age to get a CPL to 18 years of age, and correspondly, RCW 9.41.240 needs repeal and RCW 9.41.073 (reciprocity) needs changes. Perhaps put in universal recognition for all out of state licenses.

Here is the current version of the bill to do that. Poosharker and I will be looking for a new sponsor in the near future. Barring a Republican sweep, this is also the only bill with a chance of being heard in the House next year.

Few suggestions Kevin.

1) Get Poosharker a professional email address.

2) Are you SURE that we should go for just introducing one bill with a razor sharp focus, when we don't know if it would even pass out of House Judiciary, the House floor, the Senate, and not get vetoed? I'm just wondering if we'll be pissing our efforts into a wind if this doesn't get passed. If we do this "one bill at a time" stuff, it could stall out every other issue for over a decade. The Virginia, Michigan, and Oregon legislatures has multiple pro-gun bills introduced each and every year. Heck, we could do like what Georgia does and introduce several pro-gun bills every year which does what we want.

3) 18-21 year old LGBT individuals are the ones who cannot rely on their parents for home, hearth, and protection, due to the tens of thousands of parents kicking out their kids on their 18th birthday, or forced to leave after years of mistreatment. Rep. Jamie Pedersen is gay. That'll tug at a heartstring.

 

[kschmadeka]

imported post

Gray Peterson wrote:

Few suggestions Kevin.

1) Get Poosharker a professional email address.

2) Are you SURE that we should go for just introducing one bill with a razor sharp focus, when we don't know if it would even pass out of House Judiciary, the House floor, the Senate, and not get vetoed? I'm just wondering if we'll be pissing our efforts into a wind if this doesn't get passed. If we do this "one bill at a time" stuff, it could stall out every other issue for over a decade. The Virginia, Michigan, and Oregon legislatures has multiple pro-gun bills introduced each and every year. Heck, we could do like what Georgia does and introduce several pro-gun bills every year which does what we want.

3) 18-21 year old LGBT individuals are the ones who cannot rely on their parents for home, hearth, and protection, due to the tens of thousands of parents kicking out their kids on their 18th birthday, or forced to leave after years of mistreatment. Rep. Jamie Pedersen is gay. That'll tug at a heartstring.

I think we should keep pushing second amendment issues on several fronts in the legislatureas always. But at the same time, in the House, Jamie Pederson wasn't speaking to anyone at all about hearings for gun related bills this year. After mine and Poosharker's efforts however, he did agree to speak to us about a hearing for next year, and I got the impression he'd have tried to hear it this year had there been an opportunity. Issues of life or death carry a lot more leverage than issues of constitutionality or principle. (I also tried to get a hearing for the Firearms Freedom Act with no success.) So for that reason I think the CPL At 18 and Reciprocity Improvement Bill should get the focus, while still doing what we can on other issues.

Of course it's also possible that Republicans will make major gains this year and in that case a lot more good bills could move. But myself, I see that as being a lot more likely to happen on the national stage than here in Washington (though I'd be happy to be proven wrong.)

Getting this bill through will be an enormous improvement to people's safety, as well as a huge stepping stone to Constitutional Carry, which is pretty much our holy grail. (One of them anyhow...) And if we give it enough focus I firmly believe we can get it through. Back in '03/'04, I used the life-or-death issues to get reciprocity past the roadblocks and enable it to be enacted, at a time when everyone else was content to throw it up as a sacrificial lamb to stop the gun show bill. (Lucky I never got that memo or we wouldn't have it.)

We'll be posting a request for letters of support for it pretty soon. We'll need lots of those to get a new sponsor, so that's pretty much what it hinges on now.

 

[amlevin]

imported post

ak56 wrote:

From Dictionary.com:



slung shot[suP][/suP] 

–noun
a weight, as a stone or a piece of metal, fastened to a short strap, chain, or the like, and used as a weapon.





Origin:
1835–45, Americanism

I prefer a man's dress sock (the one that comes up almost to the knee, is black, and usually a stretchy fabric) with a couple of rolls of coin in the toe. If asked, it is merely your "coin purse". When used, the sock will stretch almost twice it's original length. Very effective and is often carried by older women in inner city communities.

 

[gogodawgs]

imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:

If you had a choice to pass just ONE more firearm law in the state of Washington, what would you pass? Or you have the option of removing a law.

State Preemption as it is, only applying EVERYWHERE, including any and all government facilities belonging to the state, county, or cities. (Meaning you can OC or CC in any court facility, school, liquor establishment, etc etc)

Withdrawing the No Loaded long arms in a vehicle law, making you lawfully eligible to carry your rifle or shotgun, loaded, and in your possession, or near your reach.

Or insert your own.

Let me be clear and make this as simple, straightforwad and to the point.

I would REMOVE 9.41. (and any other laws in other sections regarding arms of any kind)

Yes all of it, every single bit and leave Article I Section 24 only. Yes I know that is a pipe dream but it is what is said in The Constitution and repeated in the state Constitution.

 

[Bersa.380]

imported post

Sylvia Plath wrote:

I would make it unlawful for an officer to stop any citizen that is carrying a holstered sidearm and if an officer does and the citizen is found to be in their right the citizen is awarded 500.00 taken proportionally fromthe Governor's salary and the salary of the mayor of said city law-abiding citizen was stopped in illegally.

I like it ...... :celebrate

 

[Bersa.380]

imported post

Bersa.380 wrote:

Sylvia Plath wrote:

I would make it unlawful for an officer to stop any citizen that is carrying a holstered sidearm and if an officer does and the citizen is found to be in their right the citizen is awarded 500.00 taken proportionally fromthe Governor's salary and the salary of the mayor of said city law-abiding citizen was stopped in illegally.

I like it ...... :celebrate

Also, I would like a law that is simple in writting and states something like this: "The 2A is your CC permit or OC permit"

There ... thats it !

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

imported post

Bersa.380 wrote:

Sylvia Plath wrote:

I would make it unlawful for an officer to stop any citizen that is carrying a holstered sidearm and if an officer does and the citizen is found to be in their right the citizen is awarded 500.00 taken proportionally fromthe Governor's salary and the salary of the mayor of said city law-abiding citizen was stopped in illegally.

I like it ...... :celebrate

Just need to be pulled over 2,000 times and I am set for a bit as far as ammunition and firearms that I would love to have

 

[killchain]

imported post

Bersa.380 wrote:

Bersa.380 wrote:

Sylvia Plath wrote:

I would make it unlawful for an officer to stop any citizen that is carrying a holstered sidearm and if an officer does and the citizen is found to be in their right the citizen is awarded 500.00 taken proportionally fromthe Governor's salary and the salary of the mayor of said city law-abiding citizen was stopped in illegally.

I like it ...... :celebrate

Also, I would like a law that is simple in writting and states something like this: "The 2A is your CC permit or OC permit"

There ... thats it !

Except for that pesky 10th Amendment and the fact that not every state incorporates the 2nd Amendment into their constitutions.

But WA does. So carry on.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

Except at a federal level it don't matter if the state has done it or not. Just had my thinking corrected on that one by my attorney.

Can't wait for incorporation, it is going to be fun being on this side of that political bomb.