WA State - Pro Gun Petitions - False Flag?

Kid@Heart · Aug 3, 2013

Bull crap Dave.

I am sick and tired of being politically correct and polite while these a$$hats lie, cheat and steal with impunity.

I have no intention of giving them a polite "no thank you", unless they are really good at reading sign language.

Dave Workman · Aug 3, 2013

WAC members warm up to I-591 effort

One day after the executive director of the anti-gun Mayors Against Illegal Guns told MSNBC's Chris Matthews that people should run away from an attack or fight with fists rather than use a gun, visitors at this weekend's Puyallup gun show are standing their ground with ink and dollars, fighting a gun control initiative with one of their own.

<broken link removed>

Dave Workman · Aug 3, 2013

Kid@Heart said:
Bull crap Dave.

I am sick and tired of being politically correct and polite while these a$$hats lie, cheat and steal with impunity.

I have no intention of giving them a polite "no thank you", unless they are really good at reading sign language.

I understand your frustration. It's not political correctness to be cognizant that paid signature gatherers aren't there to do anything but collect signatures. If anyone is a twerp in this, it shouldn't be anyone from the gun community. Refer back to what rap said on the previous page.

circlepranch · Aug 3, 2013

Went to Clark County fair today and the gathers were out in full force, sporting both gun petitions, Had to laugh they sure looked like the greatful dead was collecting signitures. Puff Puff Pass

DSbur · Aug 4, 2013

They were thick at Vancouver Farmer's Market this morning, only the I-594 signatures though...

Jerry · Aug 5, 2013

I was at WalMart in Hazel Dell on Sunday, there was a gal outside that has both I-591 nad I-594. She seemed to be pushing for the background checks as that was her pitch.

deen_ad · Aug 5, 2013

Jerry said:
I was at WalMart in Hazel Dell on Sunday, there was a gal outside that has both I-591 nad I-594. She seemed to be pushing for the background checks as that was her pitch.

Yep, that's the same one I posted about earlier. I told her I wouldn't sign 594, then she flipped the board over and wanted me to sign 591. Still my bet that they throw away any of the signed 591's, hope someone can prove it in time!

Deen
NRA Life Member, Benefactor Level
Defender of Freedom Award
Second Amendment Foundation Member
Washington Arms Collectors Member
Arms Collectors of SW Washington Member

"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one and don't have it, you'll probably never need one again!"

Blaylocke · Aug 7, 2013

Walmart today. "Protect your gun rights." Was going to ask to read it and make sure it was 591. Then the fella (a tall black man with close cropped hair, which I only mention incase he makes the rounds elsewhere) says "Demand criminal background checks and protect your rights."

Kable · Aug 7, 2013

So the question is can anything be done about this shady business of pushing both petitions?

deen_ad · Aug 7, 2013

Kable said:
So the question is can anything be done about this shady business of pushing both petitions?

It is shady and unethical but not illegal.

The thing I see is that we (the pro-2nd amendment people) keep fighting with just the truth. Why don't we start lying like they do? You know, false studies, misleading "statistics" and the whole bit.

rapgood · Aug 7, 2013

deen_ad said:
It is shady and unethical but not illegal.

The thing I see is that we (the pro-2nd amendment people) keep fighting with just the truth. Why don't we start lying like they do? You know, false studies, misleading "statistics" and the whole bit.

Why offer misleading statistics when the actual statistics support the pro-gun position? There's no need to lie.

Dave Workman · Aug 7, 2013

deen_ad said:
It is shady and unethical but not illegal.

The thing I see is that we (the pro-2nd amendment people) keep fighting with just the truth. Why don't we start lying like they do? You know, false studies, misleading "statistics" and the whole bit.

I don't know that there is any way to prove that signature gatherers are throwing away I-591 petitions. Thing is, they only get paid for the sigs that are turned in. So, I kind of doubt they are tossing them.

I do know this:

There are a lot of petitions out there with gun guys, but they haven't really been coming in and WE NEED THOSE SIGNED PETITIONS!

Knock off the lethargy. Fill 'em up and get them in.

Also, the campaign can use every dollar people can contribute. We not only have to guarantee we get enough signatures, we also have a looming campaign to wage in 2014 to get people to vote for I-591 and reject the other one.

If gun owners blow this by:

being lethargic
being cynical
being tightwads

When I-594 passes, guess whose fault that will be?

deen_ad · Aug 8, 2013

Dave Workman said:
I don't know that there is any way to prove that signature gatherers are throwing away I-591 petitions. Thing is, they only get paid for the sigs that are turned in. So, I kind of doubt they are tossing them.

So, the petition gatherers will turn them in but the 594 campaign will shred them instead?

Other than the 594 gatherers and they duplicity I haven't seen ANYONE gathering 591 sigs. I plan on going to the SW WA show this weekend and sign plus take the blank ones I have with me.

MichaelStrick9 · Aug 17, 2013

I can't believe NO ONE has thought to VIDEO THESE bubblegumERS. VIDEO! If you have a smart phone, it probably does video. Sitting here talking about this on a forum does next to jack diddly to expose this. If you see these people, you need to get them ON VIDEO. Video turns this into a news story. You need to get them with the sign that reads "protect your gun rights" with a continuous shot of the I 594 petitions they are peddling. Post it up on YouTube, and start sharing it to every outlet you can. If you don't know how to set up a YouTube, or don't want to go through the hassle, message me.

The fact that Alan Gottlieb has not been able to take advantage of this is beyond me.

CitizenZ · Aug 20, 2013

wjv said:
PLEASE NOTE: WA State has a "All parties MUST be informed when recording conversations" law. Recording a conversation EVEN IN PUBLIC could result in criminal charges and open you to a civil lawsuit. So be safe. Take photos, but don't put your self at legal risk. . .

There are important exceptions to this rule that, IMHO, allow for this type of recording. I intend to record them. It is legal to record someone who is making "unlawful requests" or if the conversation is not private.

RCW 9.73.030
Intercepting, recording, or divulging private communication — Consent required — Exceptions.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, it shall be unlawful for any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or the state of Washington, its agencies, and political subdivisions to intercept, or record any:
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, wire communications or conversations...
(b) which convey threats of extortion, blackmail, bodily harm, or other unlawful requests or demands

RCW 29A.84.250 Violations — Corrupt practices.
Every person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor who:
(4) Interferes with or attempts to interfere with the right of any voter to sign or not to sign an initiative or referendum petition or with the right to vote for or against an initiative or referendum measure by threats, intimidation, or any other corrupt means or practice
RCW 29A.84.250: Violations Corrupt practices.

Whether a conversation or other communications is "private" depends on a number of case-specific factors, such as the subjective intention of the parties, the reasonableness of their expectation that the conversation would be private, the location of the conversation, and whether third parties were present.
Washington Recording Law | Digital Media Law Project

RCW 29A.84.280
Paid petition solicitors — Finding.
The legislature finds that paying a worker, whose task it is to secure the signatures of voters on initiative or referendum petitions, on the basis of the number of signatures the worker secures on the petitions encourages the introduction of fraud in the signature gathering process. Such a form of payment may act as an incentive for the worker to encourage a person to sign a petition which the person is not qualified to sign or to sign a petition for a ballot measure even if the person has already signed a petition for the measure. Such payments also threaten the integrity of the initiative and referendum process by providing an incentive for misrepresenting the nature or effect of a ballot measure in securing petition signatures for the measure.

ocarolan · Aug 20, 2013

deen_ad said:
Yep, that's the same one I posted about earlier. I told her I wouldn't sign 594, then she flipped the board over and wanted me to sign 591. Still my bet that they throw away any of the signed 591's, hope someone can prove it in time!

What if she "transfers" your signature from the I-591 to the I-594?

If it was challenged later... she can always claim it was the signer's error, since the two measures both dealt with gun rights.

Anyone who would pull this horrid trick seems capable of outright fraud.

MikeSettles · Aug 22, 2013

I ran into these folks on Monday on the Commons at WSU-V. Debated with them a little after noticing that they were A) pushing both initiatives, and B) not fully informing these students of what they were signing.

I started admonishing people that the signature-gatherers approached to "Read it before you Sign It," which really tweaked the noses of the gatherers, as their method was to call someone over and say "I need your signature on a petition for Better Backround Checks (I-594)." Then they would also get them to sign "Protect Our Gun Rights." I wound up explaining to folks that it was "Universal Backround Checks" - fifteen pages of further gun-restrictions that these folks were being paid by Bloomberg and his buddies to push for, and that the two initiatives were completely antithetical to each other.
In fact, if BOTH get into law, I see a court fight over which takes precedence.
When I finally had to leave, other students took up the "don't sign it until you read it" mantra - thus very much frustrating the signature gatherers efforts. However, they got enough "low-information voters" signatures that I believe they got what they came for.
I will deny no one a lawful income, but these folks are using underhanded tactics in an effort to support the further infringement of MY rights.
Dave, your point of not making us look like frothing-at-the-mouth gun-nuts for youtube consumption is well taken; but any reasonable effort to educate voters before they sign such qvatch is worthwhile.

MichaelStrick9 · Aug 22, 2013

Case law has dictated that if one is appearing in public, and they have no expectation of privacy, then they are fair game to be filmed. Think of the headache that news stations would have if they had to get permission of everyone appearing in their reports. Each state is different regarding concealed devices. I recommend holding your recording device in the open, at your side, pointing upwards to the person you're talking to, as the device would not be concealed.