How absurd is I-594? Here is a flow chart.

[GunRightsCoalition]

We definitely want to find any legal challenges. Even if we can't get the entire thing stopped, which is my hope, we can take these problems to the legislators to try to get them fixed. It will be harder because it takes a 2/3 vote for the first two years.

 

[U201491]

If every Washington gun owner says No. You have effectively nullified the law. They couldn't enforce it short military action against the citizen and that won't happen. Conn. citizens did it and are still doing it.


Might be a beneficial thing if everyone pondered these for a while.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/arms.html

And these are what real men look and think like.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/wisdom.html

What we all have is a gift, and no man should ever be allowed to take that away.

.

 

[Scarint]

If every Washington gun owner says No. You have effectively nullified the law. They couldn't enforce it short military action against the citizen and that won't happen. Conn. citizens did it and are still doing it.


Might be a beneficial thing if everyone pondered these for a while.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/arms.html

And these are what real men look and think like.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/wisdom.html

What we all have is a gift, and no man should ever be allowed to take that away.

.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/repeal.html
(from the parent page: http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes.html)

 

[U201491]

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/repeal.html
(from the parent page: http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes.html)

Just a few of the scumbags that would deny your rights to keep and bear arms and why we ALL must resist by all means necessary, to any sacrifice. Others have and we must also.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

We must fight if for no other reason than to honor those that came before us and did so. We owe them and I doubt any of us truly realize how much. I know it's a lot but even I do not know the extent.

 

[Scarint]

Write to your state-level Legislators and Senate: ask what can be done about (repealing/nullifying) recently-passed legislation [I594, specifically, but if they are known to be anti-gun, don't mention WHICH bill] and if they would publicly support such action, if they are known to be pro-gun.

Get back to me, let me know. I'll E-mail Maureen Walsh, Terry Nealey, and Mike Hewitt tonight (District 8).

If you don't know your reps, find them here: http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/default.aspx

If you know lawyers, ask them, too.

 

[Scarint]

Do you know who put this together?

This [flowchart] is not entirely accurate. I just finished reading the bill again the other night, there is nothing in there about someone having access to your firearms or knowing where they are. There never was....

http://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/594-doesnt-apply-to-loaners.183205/page-3#post-1177364

I have just been corrected. It appears the man is correct. Though he doesn't cite a specific source, it is apparent that the ruling comes from a court verdict, which do carry the weight of law (established precedence).

So, 594 truly doesn't allow you to let someone know where your firearms are (unless behind a lock for which only you have access). Awesome.

I'll be in violation of the law as SOON as it takes effect, then. As will be most of my friends.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

How I missed seeing that I do not know. I'm saving it as it provides a solid (apparently) argument to the undue burdens in I-594. Especially once added with the rest. Too much of it simply outlaws innocent behavior with no established benefit. For instance how does preventing transfers while at the range benefit anyone? I see only one benefit to it and that is only for those that wish to ban all guns. That benefit being that it discourages owning and training of firearms.

 

[Scarint]

I think the true purpose, intended by the drafters, is to create a registry to "assist" in enforcement...the next steps we can only assume, but I fear them.

The law clearly doesn't call for such a registry, but ther is NO way it can ever be effective without one, that I can see.