JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Lets hope some azz-hat doesnt copy and paste the language on an initiative and put it up for King County to ram down our throat.

I think its funny that people in law enforcement, and I would say a good majority of the people who actually deal with criminals, don't want gun bans. Sure, a bureaucrat azz-kisser who gets appointed chief by someone like Mayor Murray might. Or, a prospective suck-azz. But the rank and file know what report they'd rather write. Dead bad guy!

That is exactly what one of my Reps (Mike Chapman) said would happen if the bills failed.
Folks we got to get organized and get the word out that gin owners are being targeted for total control!!!
 
Once you get the trouble-maker jacket, life at work gets progressively more miserable. The only group that can speak with impunity is the union and they get bought off by the democrats.
Sounds like you guys need a SAF-type org where a few spokespeople who can take the heat are the officers and public faces, and the rest of you can just be anonymous namelss, faceless numbers... call it Cops For Common Sense On Guns or something. LOL

I'd expect the leadership to have to be more small-town guys, or specialists who can write their own tickets by skill and management knows not to p*ss 'em off or they've got a better offer waiting for acceptance...
 
Article in Spokesman today said it appears the major gun ban and registration proposals before Washington lawmakers are dead on arrival, at least for this year.

Assault weapon owners in Washington won't need licenses

According to that article the bill for requiring your firearms to be locked up was amended and the modified version was passed.

The modified version states if a child gets a hold of your gun and hurts themselves or others, you are responsible for it and will have actions taken against you. They dropped the rest of the bill that would have criminalized not having guns secured in case of a burglary and they are stolen and used in another crime.
 
If you do not secure your firearms so children can not access them, then you are a fool and I have no sympathy for you. My brothers and I would play with my dads loaded handgun when he was not home. It is only by luck that we did not shoot ourselves.
 
If you do not secure your firearms so children can not access them, then you are a fool and I have no sympathy for you. My brothers and I would play with my dads loaded handgun when he was not home. It is only by luck that we did not shoot ourselves.
Agreed. When I walk out the door one is on my hip. Why do your guns need to be unsecured when you are not home?
 
The only issue I take with SHB 1122 (2017-2018) is if it leads to an erosion of rights. It never happens all at once, but rather by small incremental steps. SHB 1122 states that it does not dictate how or where a firearm must stored. What about when next year, that wasn't enough. Now they are just going to add the "how and where "storage requirements.

I agree that people should be responsible and properly secure their firearms. I am thrilled that the "assault weapons" and "high capacity" magazine ban failed. Truly disappointed in those I wrote letters too. Only one responded with a form letter. I get the form letters, they are busy people, but I'm one of the people they work for... so I expect something, especially for something this important.
 
It's insane they want to tell us how to keep are guns locked up and say we can't have this gun or that gun or this Mag or that clip BUT THEY WANT TO GIVE AWAY NEEDLE'S AND PLACES FOR DRUG ADDICTED FELONS A PLACE TO SHOOT THERE DRUGS AND THEN GO ON THE STREET TO ROB US FOR THERE NEXT FIX thank god I don't live in a brick house BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL

You only have to look to Kommifornia for where they are getting their ideas and what their vision is. It's all for the children, ya know, and if we only save one life it will have been worth it. *insert barfing emoji here* Don't think for a second that this will deter them. They are relentless!

WOLVERINES!

As for the drug topic, that is a whole other kettle of ducks. I'm not really up on how they are implementing that one but I have read up on a similar experiment they've tried in other countries. I actually think I'm in favor of it if it's done right. The study I read had them treating the drug issue as a medical problem instead of a criminal one. They provided low cost, safe drugs with safe equipment and a safe place to use them. The success rate was actually pretty positive. People were able reconnect with some semblance of a normal life...maintaining key relationships with family, holding jobs, seeking treatment, etc. Much more positive than the incarceration approach.

I realize not everyone is ok with this. I come at it from the standpoint that the "Drug War" is a total and complete failure. What's the definition of insanity...continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different outcome? If someone has a new idea to try, I'm all for it. It can't be any worse than the mess we have now. :rolleyes:
 
You only have to look to Kommifornia for where they are getting their ideas and what their vision is. It's all for the children, ya know, and if we only save one life it will have been worth it. *insert barfing emoji here* Don't think for a second that this will deter them. They are relentless!

WOLVERINES!

As for the drug topic, that is a whole other kettle of ducks. I'm not really up on how they are implementing that one but I have read up on a similar experiment they've tried in other countries. I actually think I'm in favor of it if it's done right. The study I read had them treating the drug issue as a medical problem instead of a criminal one. They provided low cost, safe drugs with safe equipment and a safe place to use them. The success rate was actually pretty positive. People were able reconnect with some semblance of a normal life...maintaining key relationships with family, holding jobs, seeking treatment, etc. Much more positive than the incarceration approach.

I realize not everyone is ok with this. I come at it from the standpoint that the "Drug War" is a total and complete failure. What's the definition of insanity...continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different outcome? If someone has a new idea to try, I'm all for it. It can't be any worse than the mess we have now. :rolleyes:
Yes I know I'm from komiforna I moved to WA 25 year's ago but I have friends and family still stuck down there and my home town of Lancaster was once a nice desert city north of LA but now it's a s#!+ hole full of drugs gangs and any other P.O.S running from the law or other gang members move there from LA how does it go YOU CANT BRING EVERY THING FROM THERE TO HERE BECAUSE SOON HERE WILL BE JUST LIKE THERE
 
You only have to look to Kommifornia for where they are getting their ideas and what their vision is. It's all for the children, ya know, and if we only save one life it will have been worth it. *insert barfing emoji here* Don't think for a second that this will deter them. They are relentless!

WOLVERINES!

As for the drug topic, that is a whole other kettle of ducks. I'm not really up on how they are implementing that one but I have read up on a similar experiment they've tried in other countries. I actually think I'm in favor of it if it's done right. The study I read had them treating the drug issue as a medical problem instead of a criminal one. They provided low cost, safe drugs with safe equipment and a safe place to use them. The success rate was actually pretty positive. People were able reconnect with some semblance of a normal life...maintaining key relationships with family, holding jobs, seeking treatment, etc. Much more positive than the incarceration approach.

I realize not everyone is ok with this. I come at it from the standpoint that the "Drug War" is a total and complete failure. What's the definition of insanity...continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different outcome? If someone has a new idea to try, I'm all for it. It can't be any worse than the mess we have now. :rolleyes:

If people are willing, it works. Frankly, I think this is the way that society can "thin the herd" by eliminating those that willfully continue to abuse drugs.

Many of these people would not be missed, and the burden on the "welfare rolls" will be lightened accordingly. I get tired of the "pity party".
 
If people are willing, it works. Frankly, I think this is the way that society can "thin the herd" by eliminating those that willfully continue to abuse drugs.

Many of these people would not be missed, and the burden on the "welfare rolls" will be lightened accordingly. I get tired of the "pity party".
As said before my sister is firefighter /EMT and she has had to go to a house up 4 times for a overdose and 4 times she has saved this girls life I told her next time she gets a call to that house I would stop and have lunch on the way lol she just said that's not very funny LOL I THOUGHT IT WAS
 
If people are willing, it works. Frankly, I think this is the way that society can "thin the herd" by eliminating those that willfully continue to abuse drugs.

Many of these people would not be missed, and the burden on the "welfare rolls" will be lightened accordingly. I get tired of the "pity party".

Agreed. To me there are only two options that haven't been tried yet. 1) An extreme zero tolerance policy. Make the punishment so extreme that it will, hopefully, deter people. So if you're caught with so much as a single joint you are executed. But personally I don't think that would work. I think plenty of people will still take the risk. It's also a little extreme for my tastes.

Option 2) Legalize it, regulate it, tax it. And treat it as a medical issue. The money alone from no longer having to fight this lost war could do good things. The tax revenue, even more. Pump some of that money back into drug education, treatment programs, etc. Use the rest to pay down the debt, restore Social Security and Medicare, etc.
 
YES I think I would need a partner because they cost about the same one guy buy the gun the other buy the hummer

Really we have a couple:)

twin%20mount_zpshmmmmkv3.jpg

DSCN0972_zpsc0409776.jpg
 
Last Edited:
Agreed. To me there are only two options that haven't been tried yet. 1) An extreme zero tolerance policy. Make the punishment so extreme that it will, hopefully, deter people. So if you're caught with so much as a single joint you are executed. But personally I don't think that would work. I think plenty of people will still take the risk. It's also a little extreme for my tastes.

Option 2) Legalize it, regulate it, tax it. And treat it as a medical issue. The money alone from no longer having to fight this lost war could do good things. The tax revenue, even more. Pump some of that money back into drug education, treatment programs, etc. Use the rest to pay down the debt, restore Social Security and Medicare, etc.

Back in the day, Texas once had the death penalty for trafficking in Heroin. What happened to that?
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top