No this bill got proposed and they went out and collected signatures for it. Blooberg and all the million/billionaires are throwing money at it. I just saw something that steve balmer just donated 25k to the group pushing the bill.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The problem with the ballot is going to be making sense of the two measures. That means reading all of the words. People get hung up on sales. One is also about transfers. I can't take my grandson to a range and teach him to handle and shoot guns. Once I put the gun in his hands, I have completed a transfer. He gives it back, another transfer. Under federal law neither of us is allowed to have a 4473 processed. When I clear a blockage or an unsafe condition so he can continue, I just became a felon. When he is finished and gives me back the gun, he is too. The simple way to look at the ballot is more is less. One page vs. 18. Kinda like obamacare - the bill could read "get health insurance or we will tax you." End of discussion. Vote short and reject long.
There are a lot of unknowns in this bill. I disagree with what v had to say because currently transfer in the bill is so loosely defined that it's open to interpretation and if you get a officer that want to throw the book at you and your friend is shooting your gun he could get you on that in theory. My biggest question with this bill is dome ones son 16 years old wants to go hunting with a friend and gets in trouble for not doing a background check and he cannot legally do a background check so if dad is not with him how does that work?So if someone looses a firearm, and it is found by someone else, is that considered a "transfer" under the bill? My reason for asking is that it wouldn't seem fair for someone to loose a firearm, and later be charged for failing to do the paperwork to transfer it to the person who found the firearm.
Although one would hope that common sense would prevail, lately, government, and anti-gun forces haven't shown me that common sense will prevail when they have an opportunity for a media event.
O I agree there's lots of poorly written wording in the bill...part of why so many groups are against it outside of pro gun groups (ie wa cops).There are a lot of unknowns in this bill. I disagree with what v had to say because currently transfer in the bill is so loosely defined that it's open to interpretation and if you get a officer that want to throw the book at you and your friend is shooting your gun he could get you on that in theory. My biggest question with this bill is dome ones son 16 years old wants to go hunting with a friend and gets in trouble for not doing a background check and he cannot legally do a background check so if dad is not with him how does that work?
If you lose a gun you'd report it to the police (I hope!) So they would know it's not a transfer. So you should be safe.....Though who really knows but I'd assume it would be the same as it is now if your lost itSo if someone looses a firearm, and it is found by someone else, is that considered a "transfer" under the bill? My reason for asking is that it wouldn't seem fair for someone to loose a firearm, and later be charged for failing to do the paperwork to transfer it to the person who found the firearm.
Although one would hope that common sense would prevail, lately, government, and anti-gun forces haven't shown me that common sense will prevail when they have an opportunity for a media event.
The only good thing is I've heard from a few police officers (all outside king county mind you) who have pretty much said they won't enforce the bill since it would take so much man power....we will see how true that is though
Anyone looking for a trued rem700 308 win, x mark trigger, 24" 1-10 bartlein with a brake in a Rock Solid chassis? Its a hammer and runs 118 in little groups. I would like to give the PS guys a shot at it before I list it.
there is a motor rewind shop on 6th street in bremerton, heading away from callow its about two blocks up on the left side. not sure if they are still open or what but there is a sign. if they are in business im sure they would have it, or DC engineering is another motor place in chico.
Hey all, "long time listener, first time caller" here...
I wish I had known about this thread several years ago. I've only read about the first 20 pages so far, but it sounds like there were fun times!
I've been shooting short distances (50 - 150 yds) since I was a teenager (I'm 63 now) in the various spots I've lived around the country. Living in Seattle now, and the past few years I've been primarily just plinking with my SKS and Egyptian Hakim (8mm mauser) on both paper and AR500 steel at my "secret spot" in the foothills east of Darrington or at the Kenmore Shooting range.
Just last week purchased an entry-level bolt gun (Savage Axis in .243). Haven't even had a chance to zero it in, just boresighted it using the street light at night technique. From reading about the equipment some of you have for those 1,300 yd shots, I know my equipment is laughable, but it's a start. I'm excited!
I reload all the calibers I shoot, although I haven't tried with the .243 yet.
Although there are plenty of good officers who might think this way, all it takes is one overly zealous anti-gun officer (or commander) to make someone's life miserable.
I am not familiar with all of the laws in Wa. but would need to ask: If you gave a firearm to a buddy to transport to a gunsmith and he then picked it up for you, would that then be illegal? If you dropped it off could the smith mail it back to you? If your buddy drops it off with your name and address, could the smith mail it back to you? If your buddy drops it off can you pick it up? This is a great example of the quagmire that 594 creates. Sounds like the exceptions that are included in the initiative fall far short of answering all the questions. Like I said previously, less is more. When these things get too wordy, they tend to create more problems than they solve. Hence, my preference for the brevity of 591.
induced panic and paranoia.
I'm not going to get into lengthy detail, but everyone needs to remember that when reading a Bill you need to know the LEGAL definition of certain words as what you think it means and what it actually means are not always the same. For example... "Consideration" by legal definition is something of value given by both parties to a contract that induces them to enter into the agreement to exchange mutual performances, not careful thought like many are believing. Also, look up the legal definition of transfer. There are plenty poorly written parts in that Bill with items that bring concern, but people are reading the Bill and throwing out all kinds of wild scenarios based upon false definitions to induce panic which makes us look paranoid.[/Q
Nick - You make a valid point. In conducting my research about I594 I've seen some of the pro 2A forums throw out scenarios that are clearly covered by the exemptions in the law. I don't like having my blood pressure raised in an attempt to motivate the base.
I would like to be proven wrong regarding the scenario I cited - that is why I'm posting here.
Here's the legal definition of transfer: transfer legal definition of transfer Consideration is not required to transfer something to another person. For example, we would both be in hot water if I let you borrow and take home one of my NFA items to try it out. It would be considered an unauthorized transfer - money does not have to change hands. I594 does not appear to be any different in this regard.
I consulted the Senate Bill Report and the exemptions and pretty clear. The scenario that I cite is a transfer and not covered by any of these exemptions http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bi... Reports/Senate/INITIATIVE 594 SBA LAW 14.pdf
All the other information I could find on the Initiative was partisan.
If the initiative passes, and it is not nullified by the passage of 591, I expect the State Attorney General will be asked to issue certain clarifications. If needed, I expect the legislature can correct some of the "flypaper" language that can entrap otherwise honest citizens.
Welcome. Come on out to one of the UNC matches and meet some of the crew.
Nick, what have you broken this week? Hope all is well!
Nick - You make a valid point. In conducting my research about I594 I've seen some of the pro 2A forums throw out scenarios that are clearly covered by the exemptions in the law. I don't like having my blood pressure raised in an attempt to motivate the base.
I would like to be proven wrong regarding the scenario I cited - that is why I'm posting here.
Here's the legal definition of transfer: transfer legal definition of transfer Consideration is not required to transfer something to another person. For example, we would both be in hot water if I let you borrow and take home one of my NFA items to try it out. It would be considered an unauthorized transfer - money does not have to change hands. I594 does not appear to be any different in this regard.
I consulted the Senate Bill Report and the exemptions and pretty clear. The scenario that I cite is a transfer and not covered by any of these exemptions http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bi... Reports/Senate/INITIATIVE 594 SBA LAW 14.pdf
All the other information I could find on the Initiative was partisan.
If the initiative passes, and it is not nullified by the passage of 591, I expect the State Attorney General will be asked to issue certain clarifications. If needed, I expect the legislature can correct some of the "flypaper" language that can entrap otherwise honest citizens.
Known,
I checked the UNC calendar for October (probably the first time I'd be able to get out there)...are those matches called the "Practical Rifle Match", like the one on Saturday, Oct. 4? Or are they listed as something else?
rick3
Also look up the legal definition of transfer as per the ATF. You have to have the intent of changing ownership of the item.
I did: https://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8-chapter-9.pdf
The term “transfer” is broadly defined by the NFA to include “selling, assigning, pledging, leasing, loaning, giving away, or otherwise disposing of” an NFA firearm.
The ATF FAQ is even more direct: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/national-firearms-act-firearms.html#unregistered-nfa
Q: What can happen to someone who has an NFA firearm which is not registered to him?
Violators may be fined not more than $250,000, and imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. In addition, any vessel, vehicle or aircraft used to transport, conceal or possess an unregistered NFA firearm is subject to seizure and forfeiture, as is the weapon itself.
[49 U.S.C. 781-788, 26 U.S.C. 5861 and 5872]
I'm sure prosecutorial discretion comes into play under many of these circumstances. I was the foreman on a jury trial in Seattle and the only time intent came into play was when we considered an enhancement to the original charge. I'm happy with the decision we made because the additional time he would have served was way out of proportion to the crime committed.
As Unkown pointed out in his post, I just don't want to be in the position of being at the whim of an overzealous law enforcement professional or the local prosecutor. Something that may not get a second look in Prosser may land me in lockup in Seattle.
There are lots of other things that we do everyday that make us potential criminals. This is now on my reading list: Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent: Harvey A. Silverglate: 9781594032554: Amazon.com: Books
Heck, my father has terminal cancer and a script for medical marijuana. Technically the Feds could waltz in and prosecute him and probably take me down because he lives with us. Despite AG Holder's direction for federal prosecutors to back off marijuana charges in WA and CO, it has not prevented the over-zealous prosecution of the couple from Kettle Falls.
I love it! Right on Nick! My mother used the THC pills to help in her last days and it helped. She never wanted to smoke it. I have worked with many potheads and they do think much slower than sober. My 130 mile commute to Ballard every day has become way worse since the legalization of weed. Like you said, it sure has helped the snack food industry. Even Jack in the Box is taking advantage of it. You seen that stupid Jack in the box ad "elbow for ears" the one with the hippie girl with herpes? lol.Your context is in regards to registered NFA items like suppressors, SBRs, Full-Auto, etc... not general transfers such as standard rifles, shotguns, and pistols. Intent is always a factor in court when determining if someones actions where in-line with the law ESPECIALLY when interpreting new laws and passing possible precedent. As for all the rest... 1: I'm not going to watch a conspiracy video or even talk about it, and 2: It's still against Federal Law and asking any Prosecutor to not prosecute someone who is in known violation of the law goes against their very oath. I'm 100% for medical use, but anything past that I feel zero empathy for since I've been around enough potheads to know that there are ZERO benefits other than promoting the snack food industry and making those who bordered on retarded become exactly that.
I love it! Right on Nick! My mother used the THC pills to help in her last days and it helped. She never wanted to smoke it. I have worked with many potheads and they do think much slower than sober. My 130 mile commute to Ballard every day has become way worse since the legalization of weed. Like you said, it sure has helped the snack food industry. Even Jack in the Box is taking advantage of it. You seen that stupid Jack in the box ad "elbow for ears" the one with the hippie girl with herpes? lol.
Brian
Known..Seeing how the marijuana helps my Dad's nausea was really an eye opener for me. He doesn't smoke it. Instead he's been using what is called "Simpson's Oil". It has the consistency of grease and you mix it in food. Zofran and the other anti-nausea meds just don't have the same effect. On the other hand, it's very difficult to dose. Too much and he will get up at night and urinate on the furniture.
I agree - the regular users of marijuana that I've known would never blow the doors off an IQ test. But if folks want to use it, I'm all in favor of taking the blood out of the supply chain. Much of the drug related violence involves firearms which is turn leads to more calls for gun control.
I agree - the regular users of marijuana that I've known would never blow the doors off an IQ test. But if folks want to use it, I'm all in favor of taking the blood out of the supply chain. Much of the drug related violence involves firearms which is turn leads to more calls for gun control.
I'm thinking of registering for the Spokane Tac Rifle match Sept 27-28. Anyone from the Seattle or Eastside area going from whom I could catch a ride with?