Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

More nonsense in WA:


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 12 January 2016 - 10:39 PM

http://app.leg.wa.go...=2374&year=2015

 

 

TL/DR: Proposed statewide ammo tax by these guys:Representatives Senn, Kagi, Appleton, Walkinshaw, McBride, Peterson, Pollet, and Farrell


8 pages of crap:

 

1 AN ACT Relating to a statewide ammunition fee to fund local 2 public safety; amending RCW 82.14.310 and 82.14.330; adding new 3 sections to chapter 9.41 RCW; creating new sections; and prescribing penalties.4 5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: 6 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. (1) The legislature finds that, in the 7 United States, between ten and twelve billion rounds of ammunition 8 are sold each year. The legislature further finds that gun ownership 9 is linked to increased gun-related homicide and accidental deaths. In 10 Washington, more people die from firearm-related deaths than from 11 motor vehicle crashes each year, leading to tremendous costs to local 12 law enforcement agencies and the public. 13 (2) The legislature hereby imposes a statewide fee upon the 14 retail sale of ammunition in order to provide funding for public 15 safety in Washington communities, especially those dealing with gun- 16 related violence. The ammunition fee does not infringe upon the right 17 of the citizens of Washington state to bear arms. Rather, the 18 ammunition fee offsets the impacts of gun-related violence which are 19 directly and indirectly tied to the sale of ammunition. H-3381.2 HOUSE BILL 2374 State of Washington 64th Legislature 2016 Regular Session By Representatives Senn, Kagi, Appleton, Walkinshaw, McBride, Peterson, Pollet, and Farrell Read first time 01/12/16. Referred to Committee on Judiciary. p. 1 HB 2374 1 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:2 3 (1) There is levied and collected a fee upon the retail sale of 4 all ammunition in an amount equal to five cents per round of 5 ammunition. The fee imposed under this section must be paid by the 6 buyer to the seller. Each seller must collect from the buyer the full 7 amount of the fee in respect to each retail sale of ammunition. The 8 fee collected from the buyer by the seller must be paid to the 9 department of revenue in accordance with RCW 82.32.045. 10 (2) The fee imposed under subsection (1) of this section does not 11 apply to the retail sale of ammunition to federal, state, or local 12 public safety or law enforcement agencies or to the United States military.13 14 (3) All other applicable provisions of chapter 82.32 RCW have 15 full force and application with respect to the fee imposed under this 16 section. The department of revenue must administer this section. 17 (4) Receipts from the ammunition fee imposed in this section must be distributed as follows:18 19 (a) Fifty percent of the receipts must be deposited into the 20 county criminal justice assistance account for distribution according to RCW 82.14.310.21 22 (B) Fifty percent of the receipts must be deposited into the 23 municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution according to RCW 82.14.330.24 25 (5) As used in this section, "ammunition" means cartridge cases, 26 primers, bullets, or propellant powder designed for use in any firearm.27 28 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:29 30 (1) The fees required to be collected by the seller under section 31 2 of this act are deemed to be held in trust by the seller until paid 32 to the department of revenue, and any seller who appropriates or 33 converts the fees collected to his or her own use or to any use other 34 than the payment of the fees to the extent that the money required to 35 be collected is not available for payment on the due date as 36 prescribed in this chapter is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. 37 (2) If any seller fails to collect the fees imposed under section 38 2 of this act or having collected the fees, fails to pay the 39 collected fees to the department of revenue in the manner prescribed p. 2 HB 2374 1 in section 2 of this act, whether such failure is the result of his 2 or her own acts or the result of acts or conditions beyond the 3 seller's control, the seller is nevertheless, personally liable to the state for the amount of the fees.4 5 (3) The amount of the fees, until paid by the buyer to the seller 6 or to the department of revenue, constitutes a debt from the buyer to 7 the seller. Any seller who fails or refuses to collect the fees as 8 required with intent to violate the provisions of this chapter or to 9 gain some advantage or benefit, either direct or indirect, and any 10 buyer who refuses to pay any fees due under this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor.11 12 Sec. 4. RCW 82.14.310 and 2013 2nd sp.s. c 4 s 1004 are each amended to read as follows:13 14 (1) The county criminal justice assistance account is created in the state treasury.15 16 (a) Beginning in fiscal year 2000, the state treasurer must 17 transfer into the county criminal justice assistance account from the 18 general fund the sum of twenty-three million two hundred thousand 19 dollars divided into four equal deposits occurring on July 1, October 20 1, January 1, and April 1. For each fiscal year thereafter, the state 21 treasurer must increase the total transfer by the fiscal growth 22 factor, as defined in RCW 43.135.025, forecast for that fiscal year 23 by the office of financial management in November of the preceding year.24 25 (B) Fifty percent of receipts from the fee authorized in section 26 2 of this act must be deposited into the county criminal justice 27 assistance account, subject to distribution under this section. 28 (2) The moneys deposited in the county criminal justice 29 assistance account for distribution under this section, less any 30 moneys appropriated for purposes under subsection (4) of this 31 section, must be distributed at such times as distributions are made 32 under RCW 82.44.150 and on the relative basis of each county's 33 funding factor as determined under this subsection. (a) A county's funding factor is the sum of:34 35 (i) The population of the county, divided by one thousand, and multiplied by two-tenths;36 37 (ii) The crime rate of the county, multiplied by three-tenths; and38 p. 3 HB 2374 1 (iii) The annual number of criminal cases filed in the county 2 superior court, for each one thousand in population, multiplied by five-tenths.3 4 (B) Under this section and RCW 82.14.320 and 82.14.330: 5 (i) The population of the county or city is as last determined by the office of financial management;6 7 (ii) The crime rate of the county or city is the annual 8 occurrence of specified criminal offenses, as calculated in the most 9 recent annual report on crime in Washington state as published by the 10 Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs, for each one thousand in population;11 12 (iii) The annual number of criminal cases filed in the county 13 superior court must be determined by the most recent annual report of 14 the courts of Washington, as published by the administrative office of the courts;15 16 (iv) Distributions and eligibility for distributions in the 17 1989-1991 biennium must be based on 1988 figures for both the crime 18 rate as described under (B)(ii) of this subsection and the annual 19 number of criminal cases that are filed as described under (B)(iii) 20 of this subsection. Future distributions must be based on the most 21 recent figures for both the crime rate as described under (B)(ii) of 22 this subsection and the annual number of criminal cases that are 23 filed as described under (B)(iii) of this subsection. 24 (3) Moneys distributed under this section must be expended 25 exclusively for criminal justice purposes and may not be used to 26 replace or supplant existing funding. Criminal justice purposes are 27 defined as activities that substantially assist the criminal justice 28 system, which may include circumstances where ancillary benefit to 29 the civil or juvenile justice system occurs, and which includes (a) 30 domestic violence services such as those provided by domestic 31 violence programs, community advocates, and legal advocates, as 32 defined in RCW 70.123.020, and (B) during the 2001-2003 fiscal 33 biennium, juvenile dispositional hearings relating to petitions for 34 at-risk youth, truancy, and children in need of services. Existing 35 funding for purposes of this subsection is defined as calendar year 36 1989 actual operating expenditures for criminal justice purposes. 37 Calendar year 1989 actual operating expenditures for criminal justice 38 purposes exclude the following: Expenditures for extraordinary events 39 not likely to reoccur, changes in contract provisions for criminal p. 4 HB 2374 1 justice services, beyond the control of the local jurisdiction 2 receiving the services, and major nonrecurring capital expenditures. 3 (4) Not more than five percent of the funds deposited to the 4 county criminal justice assistance account may be available for 5 appropriations for enhancements to the state patrol crime laboratory 6 system and the continuing costs related to these enhancements. Funds 7 appropriated from this account for such enhancements may not supplant existing funds from the state general fund.8 9 (5) During the 2011-2013 fiscal biennium, the amount that would 10 otherwise be transferred into the county criminal justice assistance 11 account from the general fund under subsection (1)(a) of this section must be reduced by 3.4 percent.12 13 (6) During the 2013-2015 fiscal biennium, for the purposes of 14 substance abuse and other programs for offenders, the legislature may 15 appropriate from the county criminal justice assistance account such 16 amounts as are in excess of the amounts necessary to fully meet the 17 state's obligations to the counties and to the Washington state 18 patrol. Excess amounts in this account are not the result of subsection (5) of this section.19 20 Sec. 5. RCW 82.14.330 and 2011 1st sp.s. c 50 s 972 are each amended to read as follows:21 22 (1)(a) Beginning in fiscal year 2000, the state treasurer must 23 transfer into the municipal criminal justice assistance account for 24 distribution under this section from the general fund the sum of four 25 million six hundred thousand dollars divided into four equal deposits 26 occurring on July 1, October 1, January 1, and April 1. For each 27 fiscal year thereafter, the state treasurer must increase the total 28 transfer by the fiscal growth factor, as defined in RCW 43.135.025, 29 forecast for that fiscal year by the office of financial management 30 in November of the preceding year. The moneys deposited in the 31 municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under 32 this section, less any moneys appropriated for purposes under 33 subsection (4) of this section, must be distributed to the cities of the state as follows:34 35 (i) Twenty percent appropriated for distribution must be 36 distributed to cities with a three-year average violent crime rate 37 for each one thousand in population in excess of one hundred fifty 38 percent of the statewide three-year average violent crime rate for 39 each one thousand in population. The three-year average violent crime p. 5 HB 2374 1 rate must be calculated using the violent crime rates for each of the 2 preceding three years from the annual reports on crime in Washington 3 state as published by the Washington association of sheriffs and 4 police chiefs. Moneys must be distributed under this subsection 5 (1)(a) ratably based on population as last determined by the office 6 of financial management, but no city may receive more than one dollar 7 per capita. Moneys remaining undistributed under this subsection at 8 the end of each calendar year must be distributed to the criminal 9 justice training commission to reimburse participating city law 10 enforcement agencies with ten or fewer full-time commissioned patrol 11 officers the cost of temporary replacement of each officer who is 12 enrolled in basic law enforcement training, as provided in RCW 43.101.200.13 14 (ii) Sixteen percent must be distributed to cities ratably based 15 on population as last determined by the office of financial 16 management, but no city may receive less than one thousand dollars. 17 (B) Fifty percent of receipts from the fee authorized in section 18 2 of this act must be deposited into the municipal justice assistance 19 account and distributed to cities with a three-year average violent 20 crime rate for each one thousand in population in excess of one 21 hundred fifty percent of the statewide three-year average violent 22 crime rate for each one thousand in population. The three-year 23 average violent crime rate must be calculated using the violent crime 24 rates for each of the preceding three years from the annual reports 25 on crime in Washington state as published by the Washington 26 association of sheriffs and police chiefs. Moneys must be distributed 27 under this subsection (1)(B) ratably based on population as last 28 determined by the office of financial management, but no city may 29 receive more than one dollar per capita. Moneys remaining 30 undistributed under this subsection at the end of each calendar year 31 must be distributed to cities ratably based on population for 32 expenditure according to (d)(ii) of this subsection (1). 33 © The moneys deposited in the municipal criminal justice 34 assistance account for distribution under this subsection (1) must be 35 distributed at such times as distributions are made under RCW 82.44.150.36 37 ((©)) (d)(i) Moneys distributed under this subsection (1), with 38 the exception of any moneys remaining undistributed at the end of the 39 calendar year in (B) of this subsection (1), must be expended 40 exclusively for criminal justice purposes and may not be used to p. 6 HB 2374 1 replace or supplant existing funding. Criminal justice purposes are 2 defined as activities that substantially assist the criminal justice 3 system, which may include circumstances where ancillary benefit to 4 the civil justice system occurs, and which includes domestic violence 5 services such as those provided by domestic violence programs, 6 community advocates, and legal advocates, as defined in RCW 7 70.123.020. Existing funding for purposes of this subsection is 8 defined as calendar year 1989 actual operating expenditures for 9 criminal justice purposes. Calendar year 1989 actual operating 10 expenditures for criminal justice purposes exclude the following: 11 Expenditures for extraordinary events not likely to reoccur, changes 12 in contract provisions for criminal justice services, beyond the 13 control of the local jurisdiction receiving the services, and major nonrecurring capital expenditures.14 15 (ii) Moneys remaining undistributed under (B) of this subsection 16 (1) at the end of each calendar year must be expended exclusively for 17 criminal justice purposes related to firearm-related violence or for 18 the costs associated with the disposal, by law enforcement agencies, 19 of judicially forfeited firearms. 20 (2)(a) In addition to the distributions under subsection (1) of this section:21 22 (i) Ten percent must be distributed on a per capita basis to 23 cities that contract with another governmental agency for the 24 majority of the city's law enforcement services. Cities that 25 subsequently qualify for this distribution must notify the department 26 of commerce by November 30th for the upcoming calendar year. The 27 department of commerce must provide a list of eligible cities to the 28 state treasurer by December 31st. The state treasurer must modify the 29 distribution of these funds in the following year. Cities have the 30 responsibility to notify the department of commerce of any changes 31 regarding these contractual relationships. Adjustments in the 32 distribution formula to add or delete cities may be made only for the 33 upcoming calendar year; no adjustments may be made retroactively. 34 (ii) The remaining fifty-four percent must be distributed to 35 cities and towns by the state treasurer on a per capita basis. These 36 funds must be used for: (A) Innovative law enforcement strategies; 37 (B) programs to help at-risk children or child abuse victim response 38 programs; and © programs designed to reduce the level of domestic 39 violence or to provide counseling for domestic violence victims. p. 7 HB 2374 1 (B) The moneys deposited in the municipal criminal justice 2 assistance account for distribution under this subsection (2), less 3 any moneys appropriated for purposes under subsection (4) of this 4 section, must be distributed at the times as distributions are made 5 under RCW 82.44.150. Moneys remaining undistributed under this 6 subsection at the end of each calendar year must be distributed to 7 the criminal justice training commission to reimburse participating 8 city law enforcement agencies with ten or fewer full-time 9 commissioned patrol officers the cost of temporary replacement of 10 each officer who is enrolled in basic law enforcement training, as provided in RCW 43.101.200.11 12 © If a city is found by the state auditor to have expended 13 funds received under this subsection (2) in a manner that does not 14 comply with the criteria under which the moneys were received, the 15 city is ineligible to receive future distributions under this 16 subsection (2) until the use of the moneys are justified to the 17 satisfaction of the director or are repaid to the state general fund. 18 (3) Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, the 19 distributions to any city that substantially decriminalizes or 20 repeals its criminal code after July 1, 1990, and that does not 21 reimburse the county for costs associated with criminal cases under 22 RCW 3.50.800 or 3.50.805(2), must be made to the county in which the city is located.23 24 (4) Not more than five percent of the funds deposited to the 25 municipal criminal justice assistance account may be available for 26 appropriations for enhancements to the state patrol crime laboratory 27 system and the continuing costs related to these enhancements. Funds 28 appropriated from this account for such enhancements may not supplant existing funds from the state general fund.29 30 (5) During the 2011-2013 fiscal biennium, the amount that would 31 otherwise be transferred into the municipal criminal justice 32 assistance account from the general fund under subsection (1) of this section must be reduced by 3.4 percent.33 34 NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. Sections 2 and 3 of this act apply to the 35 sale of ammunition sold on or after July 1, 2016. --- END --- p. 8 HB 2374


  • HB of CJ likes this

#2 Sim_Player

Sim_Player

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 13 January 2016 - 07:32 AM

Thanks for posting.

#3 YOT

YOT

    Pissed off New Yorker

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northeast

Posted 13 January 2016 - 08:08 AM

Geez, I hate to see this happening to you guys. You should move.


"It isn't always being fast or even accurate that counts, it's being willing. I found out early that most men regardless of cause or need aren't willing. They blink an eye or draw a breath before they pull the trigger and I won't." - The Shootist (John Wayne)

 

"You have enemies?  Good!  That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life" - Winston Churchill

 


#4 JonWienke

JonWienke

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 January 2016 - 09:14 AM

So if you buy ammo mail order, wouldn't that bypass this stupid tax?



#5 unforgiven

unforgiven

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,207 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 January 2016 - 10:44 AM

Thats just livin large on the left coast



#6 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 14 January 2016 - 06:35 PM

Geez, I hate to see this happening to you guys. You should move.

 

Nope. We should win. And generally have been. This stuff won't pass.


So if you buy ammo mail order, wouldn't that bypass this stupid tax?

 

I think the proposed tax would cover online purchases, but frankly I didn't read closely enough to tell. This won't pass. I roll  my own anyway, and I imagine if something like this happened reloading would skyrocket.


  • Spacehog likes this

#7 JonWienke

JonWienke

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 January 2016 - 06:58 PM

The trick would be forcing the seller to collect the tax, since they aren't legally required to collect sales tax if they are out of state. I don't see how this would be enforceable even if it did pass.
  • HB of CJ likes this

#8 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 14 January 2016 - 07:20 PM

They do it with other online sales. In practical terms what it means is only the biggest online retailers will be able to pay for the technical hassles of keeping each state's tax requirements working automatically. So the smaller retailers simply block sales to certain states. Like you see with mag restrictions. Your state might be able to take some mags legally but small retailers won't take the risk of keeping current with which of their items are legal.


  • HB of CJ likes this

#9 JonWienke

JonWienke

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 January 2016 - 05:37 AM

Not in most cases. Amazon and other large online retailers collect sales tax in some cases because they have physical locations in multiple states. But if you bought something from SGAmmo (which is solely located in Oklahoma), they would not collect the tax, and could not be legally forced to collect the tax, for the same reasons they do not collect sales tax.

And since this law doesn't outlaw ammunition, they aren't likely to block sales to your state.
  • HB of CJ likes this

#10 Sim_Player

Sim_Player

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 16 January 2016 - 06:23 PM

Just hoping that none of their crap makes it out of committee.
  • HB of CJ likes this

#11 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 16 January 2016 - 07:31 PM

I think they are so over the top, because they are just grand gestures, not expected to pass.


  • HB of CJ likes this

#12 csspecs

csspecs

    Top Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,597 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 16 January 2016 - 09:49 PM

The trick would be forcing the seller to collect the tax, since they aren't legally required to collect sales tax if they are out of state. I don't see how this would be enforceable even if it did pass.

 

This is true. I can't be forced to collect the tax in a state that I don't operate in.. You would be obligated to pay your states sales tax just like you are now, but we see how well that is enforced..


  • HB of CJ likes this

#13 ChileRelleno

ChileRelleno

    Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants. Our choice

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,426 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sweet Home Alabama

Posted 29 January 2016 - 09:37 PM

Alabama requires people to report and pay sales tax on their online purchases...  Wanna guess how many people  actually do this.


  • HB of CJ likes this
Ragnar Benson:
"Never, under any circumstances, ever become a refugee... Die if you must, but die on your home turf with your face to the wind, not in some stinking hellhole 2,000 kilometers away, among people you neither know nor care about."
Mihail Timofeevič Kalašnikov
:
"I am still ready to shake hands with anyone who designs a better assault rifle than mine.
USPA# 106617, D#24868, 600+ jumps in 42/50 states, 36 fixed & 6 rotary winged aircraft, Highest 28,000'-Lowest 1,500', Reserve Rides-5, Injuries-1... SKYDIVE!

#14 read_the_wall

read_the_wall

    Citizen

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,400 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:western washington

Posted 29 January 2016 - 10:34 PM

anger.gifThe idiots that elect these idiots need to move to N.Y. city


"To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."
- Ted Nugent

The war is coming to the streets of America and if you are not keeping and bearing and practicing with your arms then you will be helpless and you will be the victim of evil.
Ted Nugent

#15 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 29 January 2016 - 10:38 PM

The ones that finance them live there. That and Redmond. 


  • HB of CJ likes this

#16 Malcolm

Malcolm

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, California

Posted 31 January 2016 - 12:04 PM

this already passed in Seattle  -- NRA appealed and lost.   It went into effect Jan. 1.    This bill doesn't allow you to "roll your own"   -   it says  quote --- " As used in this section, "ammunition" means cartridge cases,  primers, bullets, or propellant powder designed for use in any firearm."  

 

so in theory it would be more expensive to roll you own if you had to pay 5 cents on a bullet, 5 cents on a primer, and 5 cents on any new brass, and cents on powder (not sure how they are going to figure that one ) -  if I lived there I guess I'd  develop a really hot load with 7,000 grains and pay 5 cent per pound tax on the powder  :)  Not to mention hoarding a lifetime of reloading components.    I'm in Kalifornia and we have a ballot initiative which will be voted on by the people in November that will completely ban the possession of any mag over 10 rounds and require  licensing and background check to buy ammo . Another bill is a  full ban on semi-auto magazine fed rifles and shotguns of any kind.  All existing ones to be registered as "assault weapons."  and cannot be sold or willed to your children.  

 

If it passes it will be a sad but  in a way hilarious because -   Since long guns cannot be purchased by anyone under 18, but until Dec. 31, 2014 they could  GIVEN to any family member of ANY  age without any paperwork , there are many thousands of  California newborns and children with notarized gift letters for AR15s, Saiga 12s and the like.    If the law passes all these infants will be required to register their guns -- Imagine a 1 year old registering his five "assault rifles"     They will need changing tables at the registration counter when all the babies show up.



#17 blessthefall

blessthefall

    Member

  • Banned
  • 76 posts

Posted 06 February 2016 - 03:12 PM

Geez, I hate to see this happening to you guys. You should move.

 

And give up legal weed? I think not!



#18 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 06 February 2016 - 03:18 PM

Geez, I hate to see this happening to you guys. You should move.

 

Nope. Yielding territory to aggressors is a losing strategy long run. It only encourages them, and eventually you are boxed in. 

 

This exactly the cowardly behavior half the people on this board are enraged about re:syrian emigrants.

 

Don't flee oppressors. Defend your turf, show the oppressors what they are. Popularize freedom. Win.


  • HB of CJ likes this

#19 YOT

YOT

    Pissed off New Yorker

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northeast

Posted 06 February 2016 - 03:39 PM

 

Geez, I hate to see this happening to you guys. You should move.

 

Nope. Yielding territory to aggressors is a losing strategy long run. It only encourages them, and eventually you are boxed in. 

 

This exactly the cowardly behavior half the people on this board are enraged about re:syrian emigrants.

 

Don't flee oppressors. Defend your turf, show the oppressors what they are. Popularize freedom. Win.

 

 

Well, yeah. You get it!


  • Long Shot likes this

"It isn't always being fast or even accurate that counts, it's being willing. I found out early that most men regardless of cause or need aren't willing. They blink an eye or draw a breath before they pull the trigger and I won't." - The Shootist (John Wayne)

 

"You have enemies?  Good!  That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life" - Winston Churchill

 


#20 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 29 February 2016 - 11:34 PM

This round is apparently won for now.

 

GOA and NRA are taking credit. However as far as I can tell, GOA and SAF are the only ones that actually did a damn thing about us here in WA.

 

https://www.nraila.o...ciary-committee

 

The SAF/GOA backed lawsuit against the implementation of I-594 was dismissed a few months back on standing grounds. The plaintiffs all said ~ But for I-594 I would share guns with my friends and family, lend guns to people or borrow them. Individual plaintiffs said they would do private sales. Essentially, the court said since no one had actually committed a crime under the act, they lacked standing to challenge it. 


  • HB of CJ likes this

#21 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 29 February 2016 - 11:40 PM

More on the I-594 case:

 

It's not quite dead. It looks as though the standing dismissal is being appealed by SAF to 9cir.

 

https://www.saf.org/...un-control-law/


  • HB of CJ likes this

#22 HB of CJ

HB of CJ

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 08:04 PM

Wow.  And I thought Oregon was bad.  We will see.



#23 Sim_Player

Sim_Player

    Top Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,175 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pacific Northwest

Posted 03 March 2016 - 01:45 AM

I don't know anyone complying with I-594. When you bring it up, people just laugh!

The Initiative Process, in this case, was abused by "gun-haters".

The police aren't enforcing it either. Thank goodness!

Passing unenforceable laws just puts into question every other law.

Edited by Sim_Player, 03 March 2016 - 02:02 AM.


#24 GunFun

GunFun

    Apparently, guy who has made way too many posts.

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington

Posted 03 March 2016 - 02:17 AM

I helped do the research and part of the speaking at a C.L.E. on the topic. I know how LE and prosecuting attorneys feel about it. Mostly as frustrated and confused as the rest of us. Currently no one intends to enforce it, but you know it put a real damper on private sales.

 

It is unenforceable, but so long as it exists it puts us all in legal jeopardy and at the whim of arbitrary and capricious enforcement. I take it seriously.


  • HB of CJ likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users