Washington the public safety and semiautomatic assault rifle act

[shibbershabber]

Heres some info...

These are the NRA "2nd Amendment Activist Centers" in WA... Ill have to admit, I dont know what the hell that is.... but I think some phone calls and emails are in order...
At least to get the NRA Coordinator sorted out on these "Activist Centers" because the list is pretty dated, show SW WA Surplus is still around and is a Center....... these people need to get it together and realize that calling themselves an "Activist Center" is more than an advertising gimmick.

NRA-ILA | Washington Second Amendment Activist Centers



This guy: BEN CARPENTER [email protected]
He is the NRA Grassroots Field Coordinator for the PNW & MT

If he isnt a member here... we all need to jam his inbox and get him in action.... Hell, get him signed up with NWFA and then tell us what NRA's gameplan is for this.



Finally... there are the FALs for the state.
NRA-ILA | Find Your FrontLines Activist Leader

Too much to copy and paste... just go to the link and enter the state and it will show you who your person is based on location.


Send emails and make call to these people and find out what the plan is and why we havent heard from them on the board here... or heard on the radio.... at least on the Lars show.....



THESE PEOPLE ARE OUR LINKS TO $$$ from NRA... This is what we pay dues for, not for hobnobbing with friendly congressmen in DC.

 

[Laughingman]

BTW, 07/02's can make MG's at will, just can only transfer to LE or ther 02's or 03's.

What does it take for an 07 FFL/ 02 SOT to make a MG? - SilencerTalk

So basically, as long as his SS-Einsatzgruppen are all legally employed by "Vulcan Warbirds," Allen can arm up as many Sturmtruppen as he likes. And d'ya really see Washington State enforcing its ban on corporations or individuals organizing, training and arming bodies of men when it's one of their major patrons?

I actually Went to school with his niece (she went to public school), She had two bodyguards that hung out in a armored S class outside. They were supposedly ex-navy seals and had some bodyguard license to allow them to enter proscribed locations. Never saw a fabled MP5K case or indication they were concealing a anything larger then a handgun....

That said, he is abusing the intention of Class 7 SOT 2 regulation (it supposed to be for legitimate manufacturers seeking LE/Military/Export orders , not a rich mans way around the 1986 ban and state law) My understanding is that is a legal grey area as long as you are operating a legitimate business. Still I'm sure he would not appreciate people bringing notice to his apparent hobby....

 

[Diamondback]

My bet is even if it came to attention the media would cover for him "because he NEEDS protection from terrorists and you Dangerous Right Wing Nuts"... and while the heavy artillery may not have been *on* Heinrich und Hermann, it was probably stashed in the car ready if Deemed Needed--and make no mistake, had they thought "protecting her" meant slaughtering you and your classmates like cattle they'd have pulled those triggers without a second thought and wasted you all.

 

[Laughingman]

I'd be interested to figure out if they are "reserve police officers" to abuse leosa act and carry guns in 50 states....

 

[Boss]

Hannity has been pretty vocal on hypocrisy of the Hollywood Elites and other rich folks telling 'the rif-raf/minions' (us) guns are bad from behind the protective fortress of a security detail. Other than Hannity, everyone else has been pretty mute on the blatant double standard. You certainly don't see much in the way of wide-angle photos of these 'more equal' types showing their details around them for some reason. Most photos are relatively tight/ close in, showing for the most part, just them. But how dare you question their elitism?

BOSS

 

[bentoncity]

Annnndddddd here's another from the SOS.. How the SOS can even consider accepting an illegal document is beyond me! Being of an inquisitive nature, I had to reply..
Where does the law STATE you are required to accept illegal petitions?
Guess we'll see where that goes.

Dan

From: "Wyman, Kim (Web)" <[email protected]>
To: "Dan" <[email protected]>
Sent: 7/13/2018 3:28:38 PM
Subject: RE: Illegal I-1639 Petitions
Thanks for writing in about your concerns over Initiative 1639. We've been aware that many issues have been raised over the constitutional and statutory validity of the format of I-1639's petitions.

Under state law (RCW 29A.72.170), the Secretary of State "must accept and file the petition" if they have enough signatures, are filed by the appropriate deadline, and contain the proper oath on the front. A different state law, RCW 29A.72.100, sets requirements for the format of the petitions but doesn't give the Secretary any authority to reject a petition based on those requirements.

Our office is working to verify that the petitions contain enough valid signatures from registered voters to qualify for the November General Election. Should it qualify, state law does require that explanatory formatting appear in the voters' pamphlet for any ballot measure.


(RCW 29A.72.100) ...and have a readable, full, true, and correct copy of the proposed measure printed on the reverse side of the petition.

 

[bentoncity]

I dare/request/challenge/demand any one of you to provide data that the I-1639 submitted petitions are LEGAL according to the requirements of RCW 29A.72.100: Petitions—Paper—Size—Contents.!
As the petitions are NOT LEGAL per state law, then please explain why the SOS office is even accepting said illegal petitions? (See the garbage/lying SOS reply below) Under WHAT AUTHORITY/RCW is the SOS "required" to accept illegal petitions?
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Wyman, Kim (Web)

Are you, as elected officials, going to sit by and let the SOS office VIOLATE State law? Or are you going to sit by and let the very people the citizens of this state elected into office violate the very laws we demand they adhere to? That would be each of you & Kim Wyman! I demand an answer!

Dan Deckert
206 Alma
Benton City, WA 99320
509-588-8842
Here's the BS reply from the SOS ....

Thanks for writing in about your concerns over Initiative 1639. We've been aware that many issues have been raised over the constitutional and statutory validity of the format of I-1639's petitions.

Under state law (RCW 29A.72.170), the Secretary of State "must accept and file the petition" if they have enough signatures, are filed by the appropriate deadline, and contain the proper oath on the front. A different state law, RCW 29A.72.100, sets requirements for the format of the petitions but doesn't give the Secretary any authority to reject a petition based on those requirements.
Our office is working to verify that the petitions contain enough valid signatures from registered voters to qualify for the November General Election. Should it qualify, state law does require that explanatory formatting appear in the voters' pamphlet for any ballot measure.

Does line of crap mean anything?

 

[Diamondback]

Does line of crap mean anything?

Means, as expected, she's just another RINO Kapo and gonna sit there and play with herself rather than do her sworn duty. She'll take any excuse she can find to avoid standing up to Seattle because she might lose her invitations to the nice Olympia cocktail parties... and I challenge her and her defenders to PROVE ME WRONG.

#RecallThemALL

 

[DuneHopper]

I dare/request/challenge/demand any one of you to provide data that the I-1639 submitted petitions are LEGAL according to the requirements of RCW 29A.72.100: Petitions—Paper—Size—Contents.!
As the petitions are NOT LEGAL per state law, then please explain why the SOS office is even accepting said illegal petitions? (See the garbage/lying SOS reply below) Under WHAT AUTHORITY/RCW is the SOS "required" to accept illegal petitions?
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Wyman, Kim (Web)

Are you, as elected officials, going to sit by and let the SOS office VIOLATE State law? Or are you going to sit by and let the very people the citizens of this state elected into office violate the very laws we demand they adhere to? That would be each of you & Kim Wyman! I demand an answer!

Dan Deckert
206 Alma
Benton City, WA 99320
509-588-8842
Here's the BS reply from the SOS ....

Thanks for writing in about your concerns over Initiative 1639. We've been aware that many issues have been raised over the constitutional and statutory validity of the format of I-1639's petitions.

Under state law (RCW 29A.72.170), the Secretary of State "must accept and file the petition" if they have enough signatures, are filed by the appropriate deadline, and contain the proper oath on the front. A different state law, RCW 29A.72.100, sets requirements for the format of the petitions but doesn't give the Secretary any authority to reject a petition based on those requirements.
Our office is working to verify that the petitions contain enough valid signatures from registered voters to qualify for the November General Election. Should it qualify, state law does require that explanatory formatting appear in the voters' pamphlet for any ballot measure.

Does line of crap mean anything?

What I read was:
We don't know if it legal or not as we are not looking at that, but the petitioners must be sure it is worded legally when on the ballot. ( so your screwed if they lie as know one is checking ) wow.

 

[bentoncity]

DuneHopper,
Illegally formated petitions, per the RCWs', are illegal no matter what opinions are or may be. There are no RCW's (or statuary cases) I've found that ALLOW, advocate nor support the premise that illegal petitions may, will or shall be allowed to proceed ahead in any manner or form. Whether or not the SOS abides by the law to NOT accept those illegal petitions is another matter. There is NO RCW, that I've found, that permits nor demands the SOS office to 'accept' said illegal petitions. In the same context, I've found no RCW that prohibits the SOS from accepting them. Therein lies the problem. That gutless/wingnut supreme court commissioner kicked it back to Wyman to decide instead of complying with the RCW's and declaring the petitions illegal. Well isn't THAT a surprise! A legal official NOT following the law. Oh Joy. One can only hope Wyman rejects the illegal petitions because they ARE ILLEGAL!

By the same scenario, I'm waiting to hear back from my 'elected officials' that have told/stated/written me in the past how they support the 2nd amendment. What they never said was they would defend/support/adhere to the RCW's. Dang!

On a 2nd note, I attended a gun show in Richland Wa. today. Of the 5 vendors I talked to about 1639, only 1 stated they were aware of it. AND that biggest vendor acted like a horses behind. Never again will I attend a gun show sponsored by that promoter.

Point being.. there's a reason why 'some' FFL dealers aren't aware of 1639. Lack of communication. I know two of my local ffl dealers are aware/knowledgeable but those I talked to today aren't. One was from my area in Moses Lake and they had NO CLUE about 1639.

In the meantime, I intend to send info to some ffl dealers in some manner or form for their review.

Dan

 

[Boss]

On a 2nd note, I attended a gun show in Richland Wa. today. Of the 5 vendors I talked to about 1639, only 1 stated they were aware of it. AND that biggest vendor acted like a horses behind. Never again will I attend a gun show sponsored by that promoter.

Point being.. there's a reason why 'some' FFL dealers aren't aware of 1639. Lack of communication. I know two of my local ffl dealers are aware/knowledgeable but those I talked to today aren't. One was from my area in Moses Lake and they had NO CLUE about 1639.

In the meantime, I intend to send info to some ffl dealers in some manner or form for their review.

Dan

This may well be our biggest hurdle if SAF doesn't get the court to rule the petitions illegal, which probably can't be depended on. Hopefully we know sooner than later.

They're counting on disorganization and ignorance to get this passed. The word needs to be spreading waaaayyyy beyond this forum.​

As I've said before (broken record time, again), every gun shop, dealer, gun show, range, match, etc. needs to start receiving the word, and then redistribute as widely as they can. Telling dealers they're going to have to turn customers away (lost sales) due to not having proper 'training' seems to connect a bit. Same with showing them Section 15 (background checks). The NRA/SAF/USSF 'officials etc. need to be getting on board with this, tho I realize timing could possibly be an issue (don't want to spend all their $$ now, just to have people forget in the coming few months). In the mean time, tell your friends and every shop/match/etc. you go to. And if you're on social media, now's the time...

BOSS

 

[bentoncity]

In preparation, I've downloaded the latest FFL spreadsheet for Wa. state and set it up as a Microsoft Access database for printing mailing addresses to all listed ffl dealers. I stripped out the duplicate mailing addresses so it's just a matter of printing labels (1256 for around $65) and stuffing informational envelopes to send/mail out. That's $628.00 @ .50/ea for stamps plus the envelope costs.(1500/$65+/-) So around $760.00 to print & mail to every listed ffl dealer in the state. I forgot..around 5,024 pages to print or a tad over 5 reams so throw another $45 in. Around $805.00..WHEW!
I wonder if ye olde laser printer is gonna hold together?
I've also created a 4 page outline of points I believe need a closer look at as an informational tool for the mailings. Unknown IF I should post either items above to here though. Ideas? Thoughts? Maybe Dave or someone from the SAF/NRA/USSF & SOS can chime in here and provide some insight?

I'm open for any ideas how to reduce the costs?

Dan

 

[Slobray]

In preparation, I've downloaded the latest FFL spreadsheet for Wa. state and set it up as a Microsoft Access database for printing mailing addresses to all listed ffl dealers. I stripped out the duplicate mailing addresses so it's just a matter of printing labels (1256 for around $65) and stuffing informational envelopes to send/mail out. That's $628.00 @ .50/ea for stamps plus the envelope costs.(1500/$65+/-) So around $760.00 to print & mail to every listed ffl dealer in the state. I forgot..around 5,024 pages to print or a tad over 5 reams so throw another $45 in. Around $805.00..WHEW!
I wonder if ye olde laser printer is gonna hold together?
I've also created a 4 page outline of points I believe need a closer look at as an informational tool for the mailings. Unknown IF I should post either items above to here though. Ideas? Thoughts? Maybe Dave or someone from the SAF/NRA/USSF & SOS can chime in here and provide some insight?

I'm open for any ideas how to reduce the costs?

Dan

You know, it might be better to put together an I-1639 fact sheet (8"x11") that can be posted and get members to print and hand deliver said sheet to the FFL's in their own area. I believe that it would be better for us to talk to our LGS in person, to show them that we care. On the plus side, we may end up finding something that we can't live without while there and/or possibly find out which shops are traitorous and support this nonsense: i.e. @LowPriceGuns). Then only use regular mail for those that we couldn't contact in person.



Ray

 

[Caveman Jim]

DuneHopper,
Illegally formated petitions, per the RCWs', are illegal no matter what opinions are or may be. There are no RCW's (or statuary cases) I've found that ALLOW, advocate nor support the premise that illegal petitions may, will or shall be allowed to proceed ahead in any manner or form. Whether or not the SOS abides by the law to NOT accept those illegal petitions is another matter. There is NO RCW, that I've found, that permits nor demands the SOS office to 'accept' said illegal petitions. In the same context, I've found no RCW that prohibits the SOS from accepting them. Therein lies the problem. That gutless/wingnut supreme court commissioner kicked it back to Wyman to decide instead of complying with the RCW's and declaring the petitions illegal. Well isn't THAT a surprise! A legal official NOT following the law. Oh Joy. One can only hope Wyman rejects the illegal petitions because they ARE ILLEGAL!

By the same scenario, I'm waiting to hear back from my 'elected officials' that have told/stated/written me in the past how they support the 2nd amendment. What they never said was they would defend/support/adhere to the RCW's. Dang!

On a 2nd note, I attended a gun show in Richland Wa. today. Of the 5 vendors I talked to about 1639, only 1 stated they were aware of it. AND that biggest vendor acted like a horses behind. Never again will I attend a gun show sponsored by that promoter.

Point being.. there's a reason why 'some' FFL dealers aren't aware of 1639. Lack of communication. I know two of my local ffl dealers are aware/knowledgeable but those I talked to today aren't. One was from my area in Moses Lake and they had NO CLUE about 1639.

In the meantime, I intend to send info to some ffl dealers in some manner or form for their review.

Dan

This is what the SC was supposed to rule on but they sidestepped the SAF & other claimant.
If we don't take these EFFERS down soon WA will be just as effed up as Californication!!!

 

[Boss]

You know, it might be better to put together an I-1639 fact sheet (8"x11") that can be posted and get members to print and hand deliver said sheet to the FFL's in their own area. I believe that it would be better for us to talk to our LGS in person, to show them that we care. On the plus side, we may end up finding something that we can't live without while there and/or possibly find out which shops are traitorous and support this nonsense: i.e. @LowPriceGuns). Then only use regular mail for those that we couldn't contact in person.

Ray

It's probably going to take a combination on multiple fronts...

Does anyone have a established communications with a point of contact with any of the associations already lining up (hopefully) with this so that efforts could be partnered?

Probably don't want to wind up in the 'junk mail pile' and if it's more than a page long, most people won't take the time to read it. Flyers should probably hit the top 5-8 issues and 'to see more, visit XYZ.' It would need to be concise and attention getting, a format can be shared in 30 seconds or less.

Does the FFL list provide emails? Perhaps if they start receiving a notable number of tactful 'call to action' emails over the next few weeks, they might start paying attention. Then follow up with visits as able.
​

Still hoping tho that the court(s) and/or SOS does the right thing...

BOSS

 

[Laughingman]

A public facing Washington state FFL list can be found here

1115-ffl-list-washington.xlsx | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Its how I found out Vulcan Warbirds (Paul Allen) has a class 7 SOT 2

 

[Caveman Jim]

I'm on board hitting up the Grays Harbor area gun shops, I've got tons of paper & a few gallons of gas!!!

 

[bentoncity]

A public facing Washington state FFL list can be found here

1115-ffl-list-washington.xlsx | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Its how I found out Vulcan Warbirds (Paul Allen) has a class 7 SOT 2

Go here to get the latest ffl. You can choose a year/state/etc.

Dan

 

[bentoncity]

It's probably going to take a combination on multiple fronts...
Probably don't want to wind up in the 'junk mail pile' and if it's more than a page long, most people won't take the time to read it. Flyers should probably hit the top 5-8 issues and 'to see more, visit XYZ.' It would need to be concise and attention getting, a format can be shared in 30 seconds or less.

Does the FFL list provide emails? Perhaps if they start receiving a notable number of tactful 'call to action' emails over the next few weeks, they might start paying attention. ​

Still hoping tho that the court(s) and/or SOS does the right thing...
BOSS

The FFL list I compiled DOES NOT have any emails associated with it. Just plain 'ol snail mail addys..
I agree on content but have parsed what I could down from 23 pages to 4 pages. (22 points of interest) I don't know what to drop to make it more readable without eliminating KEY points. Like slobray's suggestion, it's a FACT sheet.

Dan

 

[bentoncity]

I'm on board hitting up the Grays Harbor area gun shops, I've got tons of paper & a few gallons of gas!!!

In Aberdeen, the 2017 ffl list is... Voice Phone
AMMUNITION TECHNICIAN & FIREARMS, 1214 SPUR ST------360-701-9209
QUANTICO TACTICAL, 5015 TACOMA MALL BLVD SUITE F----253-582-8222
GRAY'S HARBOR GUNS, 300 EAST WISHKAH SUITE #120----360-532-0473
HENSLEY'S FIREARMS, 516 SCHOOL ROAD--------------------360-532-2445
SHOOTING SHAK, 106 E HERON ST----------------------------360-532-2592
DAVES HARBOR GUN WORKS, 1389 SR 105-------------------360-648-2260
Hoquiam
FUNNY FARM ENTERPRISES, 1889 KIRKPATRICK RD, --------360-593-343

Maybe more, maybe less but that's what the 2017 ffl list was.
I'll PM the 4 page/22 bullet points list if you want it. Like slobray said, a fact sheet instead of 23 pages of ^(*^%$ people won't read.

Dan