Collection of I-594 issues

[CarlMc]

We've been discussing various specific aspects of issues with Initiative 594 in the forums here, and I'm very interested in them, but reading every single thread looking for details is getting laborious.

Can we use this thread to gather up all these issues? If they've been discussed on other threads, then please link to those threads, but if not, just take note of them. I don't think its necessary to limit them to NWFA, either.

I don't want to spend a lot of time discussing any one in particular, but just wanted to create a simple list. this way we can find more detail as we need, or start a new thread to discuss them individually.

I'll start like this:

Transferring firearms between civilians and LEO's
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/th...orth-with-leo-post-i-594.183772/#post-1179981

Flying with firearms
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/flying-with-handgun-under-594.183803/

Domestic partners/ unmarried cohabitants
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/594-question.183990/

Firearms on loan to museums
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/th...rning-firearms-to-owners.183987/#post-1181032

Who's next?

Read More

 

[bnsaibum]

Clarification of I-594 request

 

[usagi]

people need to write or call their elected representatives and get them to request WA AG opinions on these 594 issues.

 

[CarlMc]

Clarification of I-594 request

That link works on my mobile, but not my PC for some reason. I clarified it for you:
Firearms training
https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/clarification-of-i-594-request.183281/

 

[CarlMc]

people need to write or call their elected representatives and get them to request WA AG opinions on these 594 issues.

This is just one of many reasons to have a pile of stupid things about this law, rather than one at a time, which is how we discover and discuss them. Overwhelm your representatives with the stupidity.
Rule #3 of Rules for Radicals: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Others apply here, but this one was the closest fit that came to mind.

 

[CarlMc]

I missed this one:
"Devices"
Powered nailing devices, WADOT's snow cannon, flare guns, champagne poppers, fireworks,
https://www.northwestfirearms.com/t...ting-594-implications-coming-to-light.183857/

 

[bolus]

negates the benefits of the C&R FFL license

 

[8ball]

I missed this one:
"Devices"
Powered nailing devices, WADOT's snow cannon, flare guns, champagne poppers, fireworks,
https://www.northwestfirearms.com/t...ting-594-implications-coming-to-light.183857/

Not really relevant since 594 did not redefine firearms in the RCW, which has never considered these devices as firearms.

 

[Lantraxco]

For clarification I am an Oregon resident, and believe that we're next, so I've been giving 594 a bit of thought.

Here's a (maybe not so) silly hypothetical question:

I am visiting a friend in Vancouver, and since my Oregon permit is no good in Washington, my self defense tool is secured in the safe welded to the frame of my vehicle. We have dinner and are walking out to our vehicles in a rather dark parking lot when a thug with a handgun surprises us and demands our wallets and car keys. Being unarmed I am hesitant to do anything but comply, but the attacker's attention turns to my friend and he lets the handgun waver between us. Seeing an opportunity I grab the weapon with both hands and wrench it away from the BG. We subdue him and call 911. It is possible the BG sustains some injuries due to his natural resistance to being tackled and held for police.

NOW..... as I read 594 I would be guilty of illegal transfer at that point. Read the bill closely and tell me I'm wrong if I am, there are certain exceptions for self defense purposes BUT it is so restrictively written I think I could be prosecuted for this IF a LEO and a prosecutor wanted to?

Cheers

 

[CarlMc]

Lantraxco, two things come to mind.
One, I don't think Oregon's version is filed yet, so they'll have some section rewritten to make it less ludicrous than our special version.

Two, if you were having an altercation with fellow bad guys, then that's another thing the prosecutor could add, but if you were considered a good guy in this little scenario, he would be a fool to throw that in, as the jury would see it as worthy of tossing all the charges over the silliness.

This is the relevant wording:

"(4) This section does not apply to:
......
(c) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if such transfer is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to the person to whom the firearm is transferred if:
(i) The temporary transfer only lasts as long as immediately necessary to prevent such imminent death or great bodily harm; and
(ii) The person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; "

The curiosity is the word "temporary" which means that immediately after the imminent threat is over, the BG has to get his gun back.

 

[Lantraxco]

Okay thanks, I misread that section!

 

[Scarint]

I've found these. Haven't had time to dredge up/confirm more.

*I-594 DOES appear to directly violate State Constitution Article 1, Sec 19 (multiple subjects in bill).

*I-594 DOES NOT violate State Constitution due to the date it takes effect, per State Constitution Article 1, Sec 1(d).

*I-594 DOES appear to violate State Constitution Article 1 Sec 7 (state's involvement in private affairs).

*I-594 DOES NOT violate State Constitution Article 2 Section 41 (date bill take effect).

*I-594 DOES NOT appear to directly violate State Constitution Article 1, Section 2, 24, 29, or 30. Arguments seem to be vague, similar to "grasping at straws", ineffective.

*I-594 DOES appear to enable additional tax collection, per I-594 Section 3(4)(g), Section 8.

 

[bnsaibum]

negates the benefits of the C&R FFL license

https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/c-r-question.184596/

 

[Riot]

Firearm Training issues (Civilian and Security)

According to language in Initiative 594 "Transfer" means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without
consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans."
There are lists of exceptions contained within Initiative 594 but none which address our industry.
Potential Scenarios
1. A licensed, certified and credentialed firearms instructor is conducting training for their company either as an
employee or contractor. Said firearms instructor hands a student (transfers a company owned firearm for
instructional purposes.
2. A licensed, certified and credentialed firearms instructor is conducting training for their company either as an
employee or contractor. Said firearms instructor is demonstrating an instructional technique, the student asks
the instructor to demonstrate said technique using the student's firearm the student hands the instructor
(transfers) the firearm for instructional purposes.
3. A firearms training company maintains firearms for the purpose of training students, the firearm is not stored at
or managed by a "Range". The firearms training company provides a student with a firearm for use during
training.
4. A firearms instructor is conducting training when a student has a malfunctioning firearm. The student then
hands the firearm to the instructor to resolve the malfunction.
5. A professional company mentioned above issues a firearm to an employee at the beginning of shift and the
firearm is returned to the employer at the end of shift effecting two transfers.
6. A company armorer brings company owned firearms from company storage to a firearms training facility for
training and or certification. The firearms may be issued to several students over the course of the training day,
each issuance is considered a transfer.

Read full response from Olypic Tactical below...

http://www.olytac.com/industry-response-594-part/

 

[CarlMc]

Firearm Training issues (Civilian and Security)



Read full response from Olypic Tactical below...

http://www.olytac.com/industry-response-594-part/

That makes me wonder if those wealthy residents of WA state who funded this and are also "kept safe" by armed security will find this coming back around to bite them in the arse? Could be just wishful thinking on my part. Sigh...

 

[Monica Cowles]

Okay, I just drafted a letter to the editor regarding the effect I-594 will have on my small business. I have never done this before, but it seemed like a good time. I really tried to tone down the snarkiness in it, but if it needs to be softened up a little, don't be shy, tell me! I don't want to come down too hard on those American Voters...

I hope to send it to as many papers as possible...any other ideas?

 

[MikeE]

Okay, I just drafted a letter to the editor regarding the effect I-594 will have on my small business. I have never done this before, but it seemed like a good time. I really tried to tone down the snarkiness in it, but if it needs to be softened up a little, don't be shy, tell me! I don't want to come down too hard on those American Voters...

I hope to send it to as many papers as possible...any other ideas?

If you want this as a letter-to-the-editor, you'l need to get it down to 150 words, unfortunately. You might also contact various editorial departments and request to do a guest editorial - should be about 300 words, maybe a bit more. Since you can't fit every point you want to make into those limits, decide which points would make the most sense to someone who is unfamiliar with the issue. Good luck.

 

[IronMonster]

Monica that letter is great, Its sad and discouraging but it great as far as conveying your predicament.

 

[BlindedByScience]

I've had good luck with Brandon Vick, our local representative. Here's his reply to mail I sent him today:

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the email.

I think that most every responsible gun owner in Washington State is currently sharing the same concerns that you are. We are all currently trying to weed out what is actually in the law vs. what was campaign rhetoric. The House Republican Caucus has already developed a number of bills to help combat and clarify the legislation. In that package I have penned a bill as well.

I can get you an answer from our caucus attorney in the near future, and will absolutely reach out to the attorney general as well. He has been noticeably quiet on many important issues facing our citizens, and people from both sides of the aisle are becoming quite frustrated. Staff will be back to work on Monday, and I hope to get an answer for you in fairly short order. Thanks!

Representative Brandon P. Vick
18th Legislative District, Pos. 1

House of Representatives
469 John L. O'Brien Building
PO Box 40600
Olympia, WA 98504

Office: (360) 786-7850
Toll Free: 1(800) 562-6000
E-Mail: [email protected]
www.houserepublicans.wa.gov/brandon-vick/
Sign up for Representative Vick's e-mail updates

....I'll see what he forwards along, and will let you guys know.

 

[Monica Cowles]

If you want this as a letter-to-the-editor, you'l need to get it down to 150 words, unfortunately. You might also contact various editorial departments and request to do a guest editorial - should be about 300 words, maybe a bit more. Since you can't fit every point you want to make into those limits, decide which points would make the most sense to someone who is unfamiliar with the issue. Good luck.

*sigh* Wow...thank you for the tips--I had no idea...
I guess it's back to the keyboard. This will be more difficult than I thought...getting my points across in 150 words...RIIIIIGHT!!