Why vote yes on 591?

[xtratoy]

I understand how 594 is a bill we don't want passed. I am having a problem why some think 591 will be a good bill to adopt. If the federal government adopts strict gun laws in the future, we by passing 591 agree to obey those laws. Why not vote no on both 591 and 594?

Read More

 

[Stomper]

(Taken from wnd.com)

I-591 would prohibit the state from confiscating any law-abiding resident's gun without due process of law and prohibit state-level background checks unless the federal government creates a uniform national standard for such checks.

 

[xtratoy]

Exactly! If the feds pass a restrictive law we will be bound to follow it. How is it better than just rejecting both?

 

[donaldc]

Because if the feds pass more restrictive background check laws the state has to follow them.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Because if the feds pass more restrictive background check laws the state has to follow them.

All federal gun laws excepting those relating to import taxes are unconstitutional

 

[Kable]

All federal gun laws excepting those relating to import taxes are unconstitutional

Though I agree with you I don't believe background checks will ever go away. D.C. vs Heller essentially deemed them constitutional in part of their ruling. If the feds pass a background check bill we will be forced to follow it. It won't be like pot laws where we try and go against the feds. So given that we should vote yes on 591 as an insurance policy against 594. It also prevents them from trying to tweak the bill and cram it down our throats again if this version happens to fail. Unless 594 fails by a landslide they will try again. Even if it does fail by a landslide they might try and blame it on voter turn out and attempt to push something.

When you get your ballot just vote no on 594 and yes on 591

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Though I agree with you I don't believe background checks will ever go away. D.C. vs Heller essentially deemed them constitutional in part of their ruling. If the feds pass a background check bill we will be forced to follow it. It won't be like pot laws where we try and go against the feds. So given that we should vote yes on 591 as an insurance policy against 594. It also prevents them from trying to tweak the bill and cram it down our throats again if this version happens to fail. Unless 594 fails by a landslide they will try again. Even if it does fail by a landslide they might try and blame it on voter turn out and attempt to push something.

When you get your ballot just vote no on 594 and yes on 591

It is my belief that the federal tyranny is soon to collapse and never rise again, but until then you're right

 

[Martini_Up]

i hope you're right but know that tyranny never goes away. as soon as one person has power over another, it's seed is sown.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

i hope you're right but know that tyranny never goes away. as soon as one person has power over another, it's seed is sown.

Rev 18

 

[44mag2ndamend]

Hmm, D.C. vs. Heller, ok, Shall not be infringed, Hmmmmmmmm???????

State says try this 594 or 591 HMMMMMMM Do I see a pattern here?

Is someone you know going to tell you how much soda, or what kind of soda your kid, or you are going to have at school or work today? Better yet, you can all go over and drink the KOOLAID NOW. and take a nice nap afterwards.

Does this remind you of property rights and how and what you can and cant have?

WAKE UP

 

[tiggers97]

Strategically, it puts a big roadblock for the future gun-control folks in Washington. If the federal passes, they have to obey it anyways.

 

[44mag2ndamend]

Strategically, it puts a big roadblock for the future gun-control folks in Washington. If the federal passes, they have to obey it anyways.

I would hope so, but the big money players leads me to think you guys are have a carnival shell game being played on you.

On some court cases if a party does not like the verdict that is first heard on the state level can be taken to federal court. So if I am wrong than we have debated correctly.

I still think its a shell game.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

First. The claim that it says we must follow a national standard is false. It says we must not follow one that is not. That may seem the same but legally it is not. Second, no state laws can disregard any unconstitutional laws based on the US constitution. Either the background checks are constitutional at a federal level and must be followed or are not and will not be. I-591 has zero impact on that. What I-591 if passed will do is nullify the governors ability to declare an emergency and confiscate firearms and will also stop future attempts to violate our second amendment rights at the state level. These rights are inherent on us all and should not be subject to local attacks. Either we believe that the right belongs to all and fight to make it so or we feel it is subject to local restrictions just for some of us and fight for that instead. If we believe the former then there is no argument against I-591.

 

[xtratoy]

"What I-591 if passed will do is nullify the governors ability to declare an emergency and confiscate firearms and will also stop future attempts to violate our second amendment rights at the state level." I would like to see that limp wrist Jay Inslee try to confiscate my gun!.

 

[U201491]

i hope you're right but know that tyranny never goes away. as soon as one person has power over another, it's seed is sown.

Hitler and several like him would disagree with that. They fell on their azzes.... were knocked there. and the new tyrants will fall also.

 

[CarlMc]

"What I-591 if passed will do is nullify the governors ability to declare an emergency and confiscate firearms and will also stop future attempts to violate our second amendment rights at the state level." I would like to see that limp wrist Jay Inslee try to confiscate my gun!.

He can, has the law behind him, and probably likes the idea:

RCW 43.06.220:
State of emergency — Powers of governor pursuant to proclamation.
(1) The governor after proclaiming a state of emergency and prior to terminating such, may, in the area described by the proclamation issue an order prohibiting:
(e) The possession of firearms or any other deadly weapon by a person (other than a law enforcement officer) in a place other than that person's place of residence or business;

Of course you have absolutely no reason to be outside your home with a weapon, now do you?

 

[Blitzkrieg]

"What I-591 if passed will do is nullify the governors ability to declare an emergency and confiscate firearms and will also stop future attempts to violate our second amendment rights at the state level." I would like to see that limp wrist Jay Inslee try to confiscate my gun!.

It would be a blood bath

 

[Dave Workman]

"What I-591 if passed will do is nullify the governors ability to declare an emergency and confiscate firearms and will also stop future attempts to violate our second amendment rights at the state level." I would like to see that limp wrist Jay Inslee try to confiscate my gun!.

Be careful what you ask for, you may get it.

 

[Dave Workman]

All federal gun laws excepting those relating to import taxes are unconstitutional

And just where did that bit of wisdom come from? No disprespect meant, but you and I can mouth all of the bravado we want all day and all night, but it means squat. If the Supreme Court rules that something is constitutional, you're stuck with it unless and until said ruling is reversed, and that happens rarely.

Now is not the time to be distracting ourselves with talk of possibly unconstitutional laws or predictions that federal law could change and we'll all be doomed

Right now the fight is on north of the Columbia River. Get to fighting or get away.

A vote against 591 is essentially a vote for 594 because the polling numbers presently show it passing and 591 not so much.

In order to roadblock 594, we need to pass 591. It is that simple.

We have an opportunity to derail something bad. If we fail that opportunity, we'll be the ones who let Bloomberg dictate our gun policies in Washington, where he doesn't live, so that all of us can become good little New Yawkers.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Methinks you misread me. I'll be voting for 591 because I'm a realist. This in no way invalidates my earlier comment. In case you didn't know I've been a grassroots 2nd activist since 1988, against the cali AWB