- Messages
- 237
- Reactions
- 536
Lots of new folks here on NWF so I wanted to provide some insight or options for those who may not know, or are looking for ways to be active in support of the 2A. This is going to be a tough legislative session for firearm owners and it will take all of us doing our individual parts.
Following is a link to a mailer daemon you can use to send "letter to the editor" of your local news media.
Media Guide
Select your state and click go. You will see a new window populate with media outlets. You may only select five outlets at a time. I will select five, compose my letter, send it then use the back button to return and select the next five until all of them have received my letter.
Most papers will only let you make one submission every 30 days.
Following is the submission I sent today.
~Whitney
Once again Bob Ferguson is insisting on punishing law abiding Washingtonians by coercing them with the threat of armed agents of the state should they decide not to comply with the unconstitutional mandates of his proposed "assault weapon" ban. The sad fact is, should it clear the legislature, it would do little to reduce gun violence and runs the risk placing the focus on law abiding citizens.
The language is so egregious, if passed; it would effectively eradicate all retail and private commerce in firearms. One only needs to read the definitions to understand this encompasses every semiautomatic rifle and most every semiautomatic pistol in existence today. Even worse, these types of actions create a black market for banned items. It seems the AG really does want your guns.
Article I, Section 24, of the Washington Constitution, "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." The part most relevant, to the ill-conceived assault weapons ban, is this: "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of . . . the state, shall not be impaired . . ."
Washington's RTKBA provision has no controversial 'well-regulated militia' clause by which the AG could argue the right only belongs to those citizen 'actively serving' in the state militia. Therefore, it is unclear how those who propose to adopt a complete ban on civilian ownership of the very type of arms most suited to defend the state, if and when needed, would pass constitutional muster.
The very purpose of Article I, Section 24 is to prohibit the state legislature from doing exactly what it is that the AG is now currently proposing. If Washington's RTKBA clause meant anything, it meant to prohibit exactly such a scenario. Someone ought to point the obvious out to Bob Ferguson. His proposed ban directly conflicts with the state constitution and he ought to explain to the citizenry why he thinks the state constitution doesn't say what it says.
Following is a link to a mailer daemon you can use to send "letter to the editor" of your local news media.
Media Guide
Select your state and click go. You will see a new window populate with media outlets. You may only select five outlets at a time. I will select five, compose my letter, send it then use the back button to return and select the next five until all of them have received my letter.
Most papers will only let you make one submission every 30 days.
Following is the submission I sent today.
~Whitney
Once again Bob Ferguson is insisting on punishing law abiding Washingtonians by coercing them with the threat of armed agents of the state should they decide not to comply with the unconstitutional mandates of his proposed "assault weapon" ban. The sad fact is, should it clear the legislature, it would do little to reduce gun violence and runs the risk placing the focus on law abiding citizens.
The language is so egregious, if passed; it would effectively eradicate all retail and private commerce in firearms. One only needs to read the definitions to understand this encompasses every semiautomatic rifle and most every semiautomatic pistol in existence today. Even worse, these types of actions create a black market for banned items. It seems the AG really does want your guns.
Article I, Section 24, of the Washington Constitution, "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." The part most relevant, to the ill-conceived assault weapons ban, is this: "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of . . . the state, shall not be impaired . . ."
Washington's RTKBA provision has no controversial 'well-regulated militia' clause by which the AG could argue the right only belongs to those citizen 'actively serving' in the state militia. Therefore, it is unclear how those who propose to adopt a complete ban on civilian ownership of the very type of arms most suited to defend the state, if and when needed, would pass constitutional muster.
The very purpose of Article I, Section 24 is to prohibit the state legislature from doing exactly what it is that the AG is now currently proposing. If Washington's RTKBA clause meant anything, it meant to prohibit exactly such a scenario. Someone ought to point the obvious out to Bob Ferguson. His proposed ban directly conflicts with the state constitution and he ought to explain to the citizenry why he thinks the state constitution doesn't say what it says.
