Washington the public safety and semiautomatic assault rifle act

[bentoncity]

Here's another 'fun fact' letter from ferguson's office I received this morning. We need to find the tap that supplies the idiots that write these arguments and turn it off.

Looking at the trial date for the 1639 appeal, it looks like we had better be distributing the letter Ray put together. Say what you will but I wonder why it's so far out. As in just before the election so it makes the ballot?

Dan

 

[Boss]

Greetings,

If someone is good with FaceBook (I'm not), here's the link for the IDPA State Championships tomorrow:

Security Check Required


Here's the link for the FB 'No on I-1639.'

Vote "NO" on Initiative 1639

I don't know if it's acceptable or not, but maybe they could be linked so they could discuss tomorrow? Would be nice if they used the opportunity to spread.the.word.

As to the trial dates, well, at least the motion hearing is soon, and that will hopefully give us some idea

BOSS

 

[GWS]

Everyone needs to spread the word to fight this bill. Donate to NRA-ILA and SAF to help fund the legal fight and tell your friends and family to vote NO! on this. Don't be complacent and NEVER think a bill like this is too crazy to pass. It's all on us to get out and vote this down. Don't let this state go the California route. When the legislature passed Gunmageddon we started a petition drive to get initiatives on the ballot to overturn all the laws. In a state with millions of gun owners, we couldn't get enough signatures (300,000 IIRC) to get on the ballot. Paranoia ("I don't want to get on a list...") Complacency ("Oh, those laws will get tossed out...") and just stupid laziness ("I never vote...") cost us most of the few rights we had left.
Tell your friends
Tell your family
Tell people on the street
Oppose this bill
Vote NO on I-1639
Geez, I just got here. I don't want to start packing again already!


And lets vote out this AG when he comes up for re-election

 

[MDL]

From SOS:
The Seattle Times Refuses to Print Just One Non-Biased Article

For the first time since initiative 1639 was filed, the Seattle Times actually contacted the S.O.S. NO on I-1639 campaign.

However, it wasn't for a news article, nor for factual input on I-1639. The request was simply to use one of our representatives as a prop at its editorial meeting.

Our campaign had one simple request that the times attempted to ignore, then deflected and refused. The request was first, print one article from the alternative perspective, free of their usual bias and commentary.

The fact that the representative from the Seattle Times refused this request outlines the reality that this "editorial" meeting would be nothing more than a sham.

Through a series of one-sided articles and editorials the times has already made their opinion known.

Our campaign sees no reason to aid in the self-aggrandizement and faux-impartiality of a major news business which is clearly biased and also engages in blatant political activity.

Cui bono? Will the Seattle Times Obey Campaign Finance Laws?

The Seattle Times and many other major news publications expend large amounts of money reaching voters with the endorsements and lobbying efforts within their increasingly political "news" publications.

However, unlike a regular citizen, campaign, lobbyist, or political action committee (PAC), the Seattle Times has somehow managed to skirt mandatory reporting of these very real independent campaign expenditures.

There are also questions about financial conflicts of interest.

Who are the major advertisers at the Seattle Times? How does the interest of the public square with high-dollar political donors and the financial interest of the Seattle Times, its owners, and its advertisers?

These are all serious questions that large publications like the Seattle Times can try to ignore, but these questions won't go away without these large "news" businesses being more transparent.

Nor, should similar major news corporations be treated as somehow non-biased entities with no financial or political conflicts of interest.

At the end of the day, the modern news industry is big business – and a very political one at that. These political efforts need to be reported like any other campaign expenditure; and, the financial interests within these businesses and of their advertisers and investors should be revealed to the public.

Hearing on Legality of I-1639 Petitions

A hearing will be held in Thurston County on the legality of the petitions used for I-1639. We'll keep you apprised of the legal challenge.

As far as this case is concerned, one thing's for sure, don't count the chickens before they hatch. It is still highly possible that I-1639 could be on ballots when they drop in late-October.

 

[bentoncity]

BOSS provided me a link that has the motions that were filed. Read the article and you'll love the story.

The SAF challenge brief is here.
The NRA challenge brief is here.
As of this writing, I don't know the outcome of the motions.

Dan

 

[Slobray]

According to @Wayne on the other thread (Washington - I-1639 petition flaw: can anyone fix it?) it was ruled illegal.



Ray

 

[MDL]

SAF APPLAUDS THURSTON COUNTY COURT JUDGE FOR STRIKING DOWN INITIATIVE


BELLEVUE, WA – A Thurston County Superior Court judge this morning disqualified a Washington State gun control initiative because it was improperly presented to voters by not following guidelines set down in state election law.
Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, said the judge ruled properly and he is hopeful the state Supreme Court will uphold the decision. Gottlieb filed one of two lawsuits against Initiative 1639 as a private citizen and Washington State voter. A second similar lawsuit was filed by the National Rifle Association and Spokane resident Robin Ball. The ruling also applies to that lawsuit.
The gun control initiative was sponsored by Seattle-based Alliance for Gun Responsibility, which spent more than $3 million to pay for the signature gathering effort.
"A few billionaires donated millions of dollars to buy the signatures to get this fraudulent initiative on the ballot," Gottlieb observed. "But they couldn't buy the Court."
Under the initiative, young adults age 18-20 would be prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment rights to buy semi-automatic modern sporting rifles. The measure also would classify popular .22-caliber rimfire semi-auto rifles as "assault weapons," and there would be a $25 fee to do registration paperwork, which opponents consider a tax on the exercise of a constitutional right.
The main problem with the initiative as printed on the back of each petition sheet was that it did not contain underlines showing proposed new additions to state gun law, nor were there strike-throughs showing what parts of existing law would be removed. As a result, plaintiffs argued, people who signed the petitions could not possibly know what the initiative would do.
"The initiative process has no place for deceit and deception," Gottlieb said. "The so-called Alliance for Gun Responsibility acted totally irresponsible in circulating this initiative to the voters and it not only cost them millions of wasted dollars but their credibility as well."

 

[bentoncity]

According to @Wayne on the other thread (Washington - I-1639 petition flaw: can anyone fix it?) it was ruled illegal.



Ray

YAHOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't forget, these horses arses WILL BE BACK! I'd even suspect they challenge the ruling.

Dan

 

[Diamondback]

YAHOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't forget, these horses arses WILL BE BACK! I'd even suspect they challenge the ruling.

Unquestionably... I'll bet their pet stooges on State Supreme Court are already drafting the Reversal as we discuss this.

 

[GWS]

Bravo!!! on that decision.
Bloomberg et al have a hard time challenging it because it so blatantly violated the law but I'd be shocked if they don't try.
I hope it costs them lots of money to lose this.

 

[Slobray]

Unquestionably... I'll bet their pet stooges on State Supreme Court are already drafting the Reversal as we discuss this.

It may sound like an exaggeration, but I believe this^ to be true. It's a sad state we live in, when you can't trust the State Supreme Court, because it's composed entirely of partisan leftist activists.



Ray

 

[Diamondback]

Instead of handing us a win today, maybe we would have been better off if Judge Dixon had run out the clock a little more.

OTOH, the faster WSSC moves the faster we can file for a Federal injunction...

 

[Boss]

While the $$ from the backers involved, nothing is certain, but I'll take a win today. Certainly beats the alternative!

Boss

 

[DuneHopper]

Sounds like Oregon and WA have their work cut out for them.

 

[bentoncity]

Sounds like Oregon and WA have their work cut out for them.

Every day!

Dan

 

[Diamondback]

Every day!

Dan

Question is, how do we make our area unappealing to the Californicators so they go back to Commief*ckhole and take their dangerous, unwanted alien ideas with them? (No offense to *real* refugees fleeing Crapifornistan--you're not the problem, unless you're bringing CA Cultural Marxist ideology with you.)

 

[DuneHopper]

Every day!
Dan

I think my days are done, getting tired doing this year after year. And why so many do care, feel like beating my head against the wall at times to get thru to others. So end this year going to retire let the younger guys take it on. I'll still support the fight financially and do the rally supports. I want to do something more productive as well for me, think I have done enough. And since things are looking to be calming down around these parts gonna grab me a beer put up my feet and relax, does NWFA sell foot stools ?

 

[whitney]

Need some help interpreting an email.

This is the fourth batch of documents in response to a FOIA request from the AG office.
Take a look at page 170; This is an email from Mike Webb, Chief of Staff at the office of the AG to renee at the "alliance". If you subscribe to the email feed from the "alliance" then you will recognize this as the email address of Renee Hopkins of the Alliance for Gun Responsibility. The link referenced is a reddit thread more than 5 months old now.
>>>>>>
I promised to send this to you. Apologies for bringing you down into the rabbit hole with me. Worth noting
especially for the comment about Fain and their reaction to the W&M hearing.
SB 6620 ("Assault Weapons" restrictions) to be heard in Senate Ways & Means Committee tomorrow - contact legislators today : WA_guns
<<<<<<

Is it an ethics violation for Webb to feed this information to the alliance as they are advocates for the legislation in question?
What is the significance of Webb's reference to Joe Fain while not referring to, or pointing out any of the other legislators in the thread?

~Whitney