I-594: Success or failure?

[wired]

You have to run everything through a standard dealer FFL in Washington and Oregon. Used to be you could have stuff sent to you or buy directly in state with your CCR . Now in state you have to have a background check (4473 actually ) run through a dealer. The only thing you can really do wit it now is buy a gun out of state if you are out of state. Even then its a little iffy on the legality.

 

[Gunfinish]

Item #2: "Our" plan whether some dislike it or not, is to elect a Republican-controlled Legislature and Republican governor. Period. Now, that's going to take some motivation to actually V-O-T-E (594 passed when only about half of the state's voters returned ballots; maybe some of our guys voted for the rotten thing and others just didn't vote..."oh, it's just soooooo much of a bother; I'd rather complain on the Internet forums under my nickname.." You guys know what I'm talking about.)

Not that I don't agree, but what a pipe dream of electing a Republican Governer...

 

[Gunfinish]

Background check initiative a success or failure in Washington State?

In November 2014, Washington voters passed Initiative 594 after proponents spent more than $10 million to promote it, but yesterday KING 5 News and the Northwest News Network broke the news: after more than a year, the law accounted for only 50 blocked sales.


<broken link removed>

Does the DOL/Firearms have a enforcement division? How do they even know if anyone at all is complying? Just curious

 

[tionico]

Background check initiative a success or failure in Washington State?

In November 2014, Washington voters passed Initiative 594 after proponents spent more than $10 million to promote it, but yesterday KING 5 News and the Northwest News Network broke the news: after more than a year, the law accounted for only 50 blocked sales.


<broken link removed>

and how many of those blocked sales were investigated/prosecuted for attempting to purchase when prohibited? Washington State are pretty good about prosecuting such things, but I have to wonder.....

of course, most sheriffs have openly declared they would not enforce this in their counties. Which was the one good thing to come out of it.

 

[tionico]

Can someone explain what y'all are talking about???

I know nothing of this 594 whatever thing...

ya gots a compooter, ya know about google? Try that. Or read a bunch of old posts here. Maybe you're new to Washington?

 

[tionico]

Two questions: One, what's our plan to fight this damn thing? Two, if/when we get it struck down/repealed, how do we take the offensive?

The one plan that would bust it for certain is the one plan that, as far as I know, has never been started. Washington law limits a Citizens' Initiative (which 594 was) to ONLY one issue per initiative. This new "law" deals with at least five or six separate issues. It changes tax law; effective age of possession of handguns; redefines a federally defined term ("transfer"); places an unconstitutional infringement on the process of obtaining a firearm (to "keep" one must be able to BUY... uninfringed); places new requirements on the Wa State department of Licensing yet provides no funding for compliance; creates an illegal handgun registry and attemps to create a long gun registry; places requirements upon a Federally licensed agent (any FFL); places a demand upon the gun buying public that a federally licensed agent must perform, yet state cannot force a federal agent to perform any act, leaving the NICS check fior face to face sales subject to the goodwill of the FFL, who are not required to perform them and canot be by state law.

All these changes, requirements, etc, and NO ONE has tried to sue to overturn this law on this basis? WHO are asleep? WHERE are the keepers of our rights? WHY has this not been persued by those who claim to be trying to overturn this law?

 

[wired]

No one has been prosecuted so there is no one with standing. Wonder why no one has been prosecuted? I don't.

 

[Diamondback]

No one has been prosecuted so there is no one with standing. Wonder why no one has been prosecuted? I don't.

Not quite... with how many of Tim Eyman's got struck the same way, he could call an Equal Protection violation maybe since *his* get struck down without actually-damaged complainants but this heap of crap stands.

 

[wired]

You have money going after Eyman. No one wants to spend money on gun rights. Only way its going to get struck down until someone sues is through the other method which is waiting until someone gets convicted and then it gets overturned on appeal.

 

[Joe13]

ya gots a compooter, ya know about google? Try that. Or read a bunch of old posts here. Maybe you're new to Washington?

Just jokes man... Figured the way it was phased plus the plus how long I've been on the forum as well as my post count should have given everyone the impression I was not serious.

 

[tionico]

Just jokes man... Figured the way it was phased plus the plus how long I've been on the forum as well as my post count should have given everyone the impression I was not serious.

nd more of em back atchya. New to Washington? Your Sarc font read real plain. Well done.

 

[billdeserthills]

The one plan that would bust it for certain is the one plan that, as far as I know, has never been started. Washington law limits a Citizens' Initiative (which 594 was) to ONLY one issue per initiative. This new "law" deals with at least five or six separate issues. It changes tax law; effective age of possession of handguns; redefines a federally defined term ("transfer"); places an unconstitutional infringement on the process of obtaining a firearm (to "keep" one must be able to BUY... uninfringed); places new requirements on the Wa State department of Licensing yet provides no funding for compliance; creates an illegal handgun registry and attemps to create a long gun registry; places requirements upon a Federally licensed agent (any FFL); places a demand upon the gun buying public that a federally licensed agent must perform, yet state cannot force a federal agent to perform any act, leaving the NICS check fior face to face sales subject to the goodwill of the FFL, who are not required to perform them and canot be by state law.

All these changes, requirements, etc, and NO ONE has tried to sue to overturn this law on this basis? WHO are asleep? WHERE are the keepers of our rights? WHY has this not been persued by those who claim to be trying to overturn this law?

Sorry Man, but times are tight and the 5 million of Us could no longer afford to carry the full
funding of the NRA--Unfortunately the states that pass unConstitutional legislation will
be the first to suffer

Is that the answer You were looking for?

 

[tionico]

No one has been prosecuted so there is no one with standing. Wonder why no one has been prosecuted? I don't.

After the initiative a few years back that gave us "$30 license tabs" was voted in by a landslide, some big money sued before all the ballots were counted even because they claimed it was two issues, not just the one. The courts that heard it all said "nope, one issue, two sides of the same coin". The fight did not last long.

Wonder why no one tried that on this one? They tried that on the privtizing of liquor, too, and same with the merry hootchie bill. Two more fails. But this one is real clear, more than one issue. I think the reason the "standing" issue never came up in any of them is that it is a violation of plainly written state law, thus the state is the harmed entity. Could be wrong..... I decided the misery of law school wasn't worth the reward of the rotten life most lawyers have.

 

[PaulB47]

Washington law limits a Citizens' Initiative (which 594 was) to ONLY one issue per initiative.

Laws are for the peons, not the rulers. Welcome to reality.

 

[Dave Workman]

You have money going after Eyman. No one wants to spend money on gun rights. Only way its going to get struck down until someone sues is through the other method which is waiting until someone gets convicted and then it gets overturned on appeal.

The Second Amendment Foundation and others are suing. It's in federal court of appeals, 9th circuit right now to establish "standing."

 

[Ura-Ki]

The mighty 9th? WE ALL KNOW HOW THAT WILL TURN OUT if ever there was an anti court, the 9th would be the very top of anti rights!

 

[Mecanik]

Like any other unconstitutional law we just ignore them when we can and obey when we must.
We will ALWAYS have the right to bear arms even if we can't do it legally. That's what unalienable rights are. You are expected to fight for them constantly.

 

[Gunfinish]

So, now I know for a fact that the DOL Firearms Division of Washington State has no enforcement agency what-so-ever.

 

[wired]

So, now I know for a fact that the DOL Firearms Division of Washington State has no enforcement agency what-so-ever.

Good!