Washington State is bought and paid for by Microsoft and Bloomberg

[crstrode]

Microsoft founding fathers and the past Mayor of NYC are buying the gun rights of Washington State.

Vote NO on I 594
Vote YES on I 591.

The only reason I need is one look at the top 5 contributors to the campaigns for 594 and against 591.

Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg are footing the bill.

Oh, by the way, even if you do vote to support gun rights, your vote very well may be canceled or stolen

http://badgerlakeobserver.blogspot.com/2014/10/vote-by-mail-vote-early-vote-often.html [URL]

 

[the ringo kid]

So what are the bills? It might be interesting to know--soill know how much more I can dis--bloomberg, and start dissing gates.

 

[george minze]

Well Washington state will not get any more gun friendly after today's school shootings..Only details four shot and shooter a 9th grader killed himself. Inside a school he attended. Only info at this time....

 

[foggood11]

So what are the bills? It might be interesting to know--soill know how much more I can dis--bloomberg, and start dissing gates.

In case you haven't already found your answer, there are 2 Ballot Initiatives, both dealing with firearms.

I-591 http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_471.pdf

1-page measure to tie Washington State background check standards to a national standard. I voted FOR, but only because of the existence of the next initiative, I-594. If it weren't for I-594, I seriously doubt I would be inclined to cede authority to the Feds.

I-594
http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf

An 18-page mind-numbing, eyes-glassing-over DISASTER of an initiative, designed to make firearm ownership as difficult and risky as possible for the everyday law-abiding citizen. I voted NO. Supported by uber-rich Bill Gates, Michael Bloomfield, Paul Allen, Steve Balmer, Nick Hanuer. Collectively, they have donated nearly $10million to efforts to pass this initiative. If passed, they have pledged to bring this exact blueprint to a state near you.

The devil's in the details on 594. NICS checks on all sales, and all transfers, with only the narrowest of exemptions. Transfers as defined in the initiative are "delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment, including, but not limited to, gifts and loans." Effectively, every single time a firearm changes hands, a NICS check will be required.

If enforced, it is likely to result in felony convictions for the most innocent of actions. And we all know what felony convictions mean from a firearm ownership perspective, don't we? Opposed by virtually all LEO's.

The problem is uber-liberal Seattle-ites, who are too arrogant to bother with voting down an initiative that destroys individual freedom and liberty, and does little to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and mentally ill. Unfortunately for us, it has a high likelihood of passing and becoming law.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Interesting. One is for background checks on private sales, and the other would effectively not allow background checks on private sales. You can bet the lawyers are impatiently waiting for both to pass.

Good luck there in Washington. Considering both US Senators and your Governor are F rated by the NRA, statewide votes on gun control would not seem to favor 2A rights.

 

[handejector]

I-591
1-page measure to tie Washington State background check standards to a national standard. I voted FOR, but only because of the existence of the next initiative, I-594. If it weren't for I-594, I seriously doubt I would be inclined to cede authority to the Feds.

I believe you are MISreading that section.
Note again what it says-

NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:
It is unlawful for any government agency to require background checks on the recipient of a firearm unless a uniform national standard is required.

That section guarantees that no background check can be required on a private sale UNLESS it becomes a federal law!
You should love it.
If it becomes a federal law, it doesn't much matter what your state law is.
State laws can be MORE restrictive than federal law, but they cannot be LESS restrictive.
I would have no problem voting for that.

I assume you can only vote for one?????
Since they contradict each other, it would be very interesting if both passed.

 

[ladder13]

Supported by uber-rich Bill Gates, Michael Bloomfield, Paul Allen, Steve Balmer, Nick Hanuer. Collectively, they have donated nearly $10million to efforts to pass this initiative. If passed, they have pledged to bring this exact blueprint to a state near you.

Those guys spending 10 or 20 million is like me sending the NRA a check for .01 cent
Sometimes the left loves their money more than the cause, who'da thunk it?

 

[LostintheOzone]

I assume you can only vote for one?????

Both initiatives are on the ballot as "Should this measure be enacted into law'' check yes or no. So you could vote yes for both or no for both. In which case you would help to pass both or defeat both. Initiatives and referendums become law with a simple majority vote in this state.

 

[handejector]

So, what happens if both pass, since they are directly opposed?

 

[LostintheOzone]

Not sure, I'll ask the folks that crafted I-591. They should know. I'll get back to you on that.

 

[ChiefStealth]

Conversation at the range... "Hey Pete, new gun hay? Let me take a look". "No, sorry George, that would be a transfer of the firearm from me to you, and we can't do that without a background check." "But, Pete... I have a state issued CPL, and I'm a Deputy County Sheriff". "Nope, no exceptions for people who have already had extensive background checks. And no exceptions for Law Enforcement, either. You can look at my new gun, but I can't hand it to you, and you can't shoot it"

 

[foggood11]

So, what happens if both pass, since they are directly opposed?

Since each is an independent initiative, both could possibly pass, both fail, or 1 may pass with the other failing.

If both pass, nobody is sure what will happen. Don't believe we've ever had something like that happen in this state. Seems highly likely that that situation would get dumped into the State Supreme Court.

At one time, both were passing in statewide polls. That was a couple months ago, but the most recent poll indicates 594 (bad law) passing, with 591 under 50% and failing. That would be worst case, no doubt.

Polls can be deceiving. One week from today, we'll know (at least some of) the answer.

 

[k22fan]

There is hope for Washington. During the 1990s, early 90s IIRC, a statewide initiative that would have made it much harder to own handguns went down to a resounding defeat. In pre-election coverage the big news outlets wrote its passage was a forgone conclusion. The memory of that humiliation kept Seattle’s antis from trying another initiative for about 20 years. Only the billionaires’ millions emboldened them to try again.

Despite the Democrats’ dominance of Washington government this is not the east coast. Other than machine guns we can own most any gun, concealed pistol licenses are “shall issue”, state law preempts local gun laws and the state constitution’s equivalent to the second amendment makes it very clear that we can own guns.

I’ve heard a few local self proclaimed liberals say they’ve mailed in their votes against 594. The billionaires’ attempt to buy the state is insulting, even to them. Don’t despair. Vote!

 

[LostintheOzone]

I did some research to answer some of the questions in this thread. I also called and emailed the SAF (which I support) but didn't get a reply. They must be busy no doubt.

I did find this however and I think it addresses some of our concerns. I think this applies to all states with the initiative process which will surely be used against us in the future if I-594 passes. This is a pretty good read if you have the time.

http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1696&context=sulr

I think this one is headed for the state supreme court if it passes.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I got one for ya.

Lets say background checks do become law in this state. Two guys walk into a gun shop to do the transfer and the buyer is DELAYED. Now what?

The FFL now has an open entry in his log which is NOT allowed and the owner of the gun takes his gun home.

 

[ChiefStealth]

Not all votes are counted, yet. But, it does look like I-594; the universal background check initiative, is passing. I-591 is a dead heat. We'll see what it looks like end of tomorrow.

 

[ImaginThat]

I have to go buy another gun before they get the 594 garbage into law. I hope it is not enacted till the 1st of the year, don't want to wait the 10 days even tho I do have a CPL. Plus i am waiting for the Black Friday AR specials.

And start buying your high cap mags now that will be the next item on these dorks agenda.

 

[STCM(SW)]

Right now 591 is down, 45% to 55%.
594 is up, 60% to 40%......

 

[Jim R]

They say 594 will end up in court, I sure hope so. Not a good day in Washington State for gun owners.

 

[davegarage]

Yep,

Looks like the bad will pass with the big dollars behind it.

A short trip to Idaho will help your transfer issues. If the exchange is made here, the federal rules apply as written.

I am still wondering how two C&R FFL's would be able to transfer in Washington a collectable class firearm. Federal Law states that there should be no restrictions in the states. I'm not talking about antiques. I'm talking about weapons on the list of C&R that are authorized to be transferred between two FFL's that are 03.
Just spilled a little whiskey.

This will wind up in court for sure.

Dave