Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Firearm Legislation & Activism' started by deckert, May 2, 2018.
This it is going to take to win this battle, lawsuits and court battles!
Go get em!!!
My local paper is reporting this morning that the Sec. of State certified the ballot measure and it has qualified for the November ballot.
Time to seriously get things in gear, spread the word, educate voters, etc.
Do what we can until November, then make very certain to remember Wyman in the 2020 Primary.
If she cannot muster the moral fiber the job demands, then she should make way for someone who can and will. Unfortunately, she's the typical John McSh*tstain-wing ReSUCKlican that's the best this p*sshole state GOP can muster... Our Republicans are as much drag-queens politically as Brownstain's smooch-partner in that famous photo is sartorially.
News Release - Office - WA Secretary of State
You can read for yourself. The release claims petitions meet the requirements under the RCW's.
Um, RCW 29A.72.120 requires a "full, true, and correct copy" of the initiative is printed on the reverse of the petition. If requisite strikeouts and underlines were not present, then the initiative copies were not 'full, true, and correct."
Law lays out simple, basic requirements, which factually were not met.
This isn't even complicated, and setting a very bad precedent.
Maybe she didn't want to get AntiGun Ferguson upset...screw the rule of law!
Like I said, Lacking Moral Fiber... the same kind of cowardice that got Admiral Byng hanged by his own Marines, from the yardarm of his own flagship.
Batch 3 FOIA response linked below on my public dropbox.
Dropbox - B3 PC.pdf
This is a long game, and will not be won at the local level. Please take some time and look through the documents. It may look formidable at first as there are 337 pages of "crap". I'm working on getting the redacted information. Look mostly at the emails and also note the AG office claims to have a "firearms expert" on staff. As always they are taking the tack that the cosmetic features of scary rifles should get them banned. This is of course not news to anyone here. The only way to defeat this is to VOTE; get Ferguson out and clean up our Senate. VOTE VOTE VOTE.
The only reason we got saddled with I 594 is because gun owners did not vote. You can refute my comment if you like, but the secretary of state has the November 2013 voting stats on the SOS website.
FWIW, I wrote the ATG office & asked why they weren't on this in court to dismiss the illegal petitions. Strangely enough..I don't remember asking the ATG for ANY legal advice or comments on I-1639.
Anyway, here's their response..
Sent: 8/2/2018 1:10:21 PM
Subject: RE: Contact AGO - Illegal 1639 petitions
Thank you for your inquiry to the Attorney General's Office. I was asked to respond to your email because I am one of the attorneys that works on election-related issues. As an attorney for the State, I cannot provide you with legal advice or comment on Initiative 1639. I can tell you that two lawsuits have been filed against Initiative 1639. You may track the cases by going to the Thurston County Clerk's Online Records Website, Odyssey Portal - Washington Courts Online Case Search, and entering the docket number 18-2-03747-34 or 18-03748-34.
Thank you again for your communication. Please note that the information in this email does not constitute an opinion of the Attorney General or any of our client agencies.
Callie A. Castillo
Deputy Solicitor General
Not a straight answer to my questions in any shape, manner or form.
Subject: Illegal 1639 petitions
Message: I would like to know why your office has not stepped in to prohibit Kim Wyman from accepting the I-1639 petitions that fail to meet state law.
I know Ferguson is anti-gun and I know someone in the ATG office wrote the foul prejudicial language for the initial submittal that was challenged & changed.
Why isn't the ATG office willing to protect and uphold it's duty to the voters in this state? If no one is above the law, like the ATG office asserted with Arlenes Flowers you so vigorously pursued, then why has the ATG office not taken action against the filing of the illegal I-1639 petitions?
If your office is to protect the citizens and registered voters such as myself as you keep stating, then why have you not sought to declare those illegal petitions null & void?
That being said, I wrote Castillo back again with the same questions in a tad different wording. I'll see what transpires after. I'd encourage more people to write the ATG office & start asking questions of them. I'm sending the questions & Castillo reply to my elected officials & asking why they're not responding to the illegal action by fergusons' office.
I think the initial dismay of the Sec. of State accepting the petitions which were not in compliance with state law is wearing off (hopefully). And we're all hopeful that the lawsuits quash I-1639 from being on the ballot.
That being said, this is probably the proverbial 'Hope for the best, expect the worse' scenario. As such, yes, the word is going to have to continue being spread at every opportunity. I've reached out on multiple other forums, and on more than one occasion got the 'Never heard of it [I-1639].' Lots of folks asleep at the wheel on this one (which is what the opposition is counting on). And if you have some cash to spare, now is a great time to donate to SAF and SOS.
If any of you are going to the IDPA State Championships on next weekend (Aug. 11), great opportunity reach a lot of folks (with FAS's blessing of course). Unfortunately, I can't make it.
Found there's a FB page...if any of you are on social media, you can use it to spread the word...
Vote "NO" on Initiative 1639
I have some notes that I have dictated so I can write letters to all those elected anti-gun bubble-gummers and will report back with replies soon.
We are the last line of defense on this folks so GET OFF THE COUCH!!!
Spreading the word amongst friends and family, will see if SafeFire has anything up already, and if they're willing to put up a sign / have a stack of fliers.
Spreading the word one-on-one to any and all who'll listen here...
@deckert , @Boss , @Caveman Jim and other members, Can we get a list either posted or sent to or e-mails of the FFL's, ranges and stores so that we can start sending out information on I-1639.
I have the 2018 State ffl list if anyone wants it. It's an excel spreadsheet so it won't upload here. PM me your email & I'll send it to whomever wants it. It's public information.
No email addy's in it, just real mailing addys.
I also made it into a database (microsoft office) in order to print mailing labels from it. Just let me know which/what you want. I deleted the duplicates in the database but that still left 1248 different addresses.
As for contact info.. in my neck of the woods.
I'll contact persons around the Tri-City area (that'll cover about 70~80 ffl's) after I see what happens in court on the SAF appeal. See the link/docket #'s in post #268.
If more people have the database I made, they could post up here to say which city (s) they'll handle so we aren't duplicating each others work.
@deckert, Thanks. Ray and Boss are sending it my way. I looked at the ATF website but couldn't remember if one of you had updated the info. Will be seeing what happens in court on both fronts.
I'm thinking we all need to take a step sideways here and figure on funding our own front to get the word out if the SAF appeal fails. Although I donated to the SAF and am an NRA member, I'm still printing/distributing info to anyone that will read it. I can only encourage others to do the same.
As for getting the word out, I've been to a few local gun stores to discuss this abomination with them and I've given them the SOS handout (https://saveoursecurity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/NO-on-I-1639-Handout.pdf). After reading the handout numerous times, I don't think it expresses the gravity of the situation strongly enough, so I created one, using some of the same tactics the anti's use against us (below).
I'm going have them printed in color and will go back to those same FFL's and ask them to post the new one also, as I think it will grab peoples attention better and shows what we have in store if it passes.
If you want a copy (Word or PDF) to share with people, PM me your email address and I'll get it to you.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the commerce clause preempt state regulation attempting to block interstate commerce? So attempting to make it illegal for a FFL to sell a firearm to a out of state (via legal transfer or otherwise) with be thrown out if federal court fairly quickly?