quote:

Originally posted by airsoft guy:
I'm a little confused. I thought the majority of the law went into effect on July 1st (how appropriate, *barf*), it's just the age restriction starts on January 1st? So those of us over 21 have until July to acquire such deadly fully-semiautomatic assault gats as the evil Marlin Papoose, right?

That's about right.

Hopefully it won't come to that:

https://www.nraila.org/article...l-violations-in-1639

Boss

That was a nice thing to wake up to last night, knew it was coming, but still real nice.

Now, again, this is a bit outside what I know, but they're doing this in a federal court, not a state court, right? So it could have effects on other states in regards to similar laws, yes? So it's in everyone's best interest that we win here, not just for Washington?

quote:

Originally posted by airsoft guy:
That was a nice thing to wake up to last night, knew it was coming, but still real nice.

Now, again, this is a bit outside what I know, but they're doing this in a federal court, not a state court, right? So it could have effects on other states in regards to similar laws, yes? So it's in everyone's best interest that we win here, not just for Washington?

Yes, I'm not an attorney, but there's a 'bigger picture' here. As I understand it, 2 retailers and 4 sub-21 year olds filed in Federal Court, to get around WA's leftist state court, with additional plaintiffs likely. So this will likely take awhile.

One (of many) 1639 concerns is New Sec. 19:

If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid or preempted by federal law, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected.

That could certainly appear to set up a long drawn out fight on each and every aspect of 1639.

Pretty shady...put in multiple micro-font provisions in violation of initiative process (they're supposed to be single topic), and then put in a new section specifically stating that if any of the provisions are struck down, the rest stay in effect, essentially attempting to circumvent the entire single topic requirement. So essentially attempting to enact a law, buried in a new section, that allows non-compliance with the requirements.

So it will be interesting to see what happens here soon, and in the mean time...if it's being contested in court, is it put in effect or postponed until the courts resolve it? I dunno. Regardless, it's gonna cost ALOT (secondary part of the plan).

And there's still Olympia to deal with in a couple months.

But its either that, or 1639 becomes law unopposed.

BOSS

Since we're talking about Washington...

https://www.seattletimes.com/s...s-and-firing-ranges/

King County will require health-warning signs at gun stores and firing ranges

Originally published November 16, 2018 at 5:23 pm Updated November 17, 2018 at 12:14 pm

The regulation is set to take effect next month, though Public Health - Seattle & King County does not yet have the budget to enforce it.

By Daniel Beekman
Seattle Times staff reporter

King County will require gun sellers and ranges to post signs warning about the danger of firearms.

The King County Board of Health voted unanimously Thursday to pass the regulation, describing it as the first of its kind on the West Coast.

The regulation is set to take effect next month, though Public Health – Seattle & King County does not yet have the budget to enforce it.

Metropolitan King County Councilmember Joe McDermott proposed the regulation in July, saying he hoped it would help spread information in the same way that health-warning labels on cigarette packs have.

“We need to be open and honest about the harm that guns can cause,” McDermott said in a statement.

The signs will read, “WARNING: The presence of a firearm in the home significantly increases the risk of suicide, homicide, death during domestic violence disputes and unintentional deaths to children, household members and others.”

They’ll also need to provide information about the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline.

The signs will need to be at least 8.5 inches by 11 inches in size and use at least 48-point type. They’ll need to be posted at the entrance of gun stores and ranges and in at least one additional area.

Gun sellers and ranges that violate the regulation will be given an initial warning and then be subject to civil fines of up to $100 per violation.

Board of Health regulations apply to all of the county’s 39 cities and to its unincorporated areas.

Public Health staff have estimated they would need about $263,000 to enforce the new regulation for all 236 licensed gun sellers, including those without brick-and-mortar locations.

The staff have estimated they would need about $218,000 to enforce it only for those with brick-and-mortar locations. Public Health currently has the budget for neither option.

“Now that the regulation has passed, (Public Health) will work on implementation,” said David Shurtleff, spokesman for the County Council. “This could include a funding request made to council or a request to authorize them to shift existing resources.”



Daniel Beekman: 206-464-2164 or dbeekman@seattletimes.com; on Twitter: @dbeekman.
Seattle Times staff reporter Daniel Beekman covers Seattle city government and local politics.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:
Metropolitan King County Councilmember Joe McDermott proposed the regulation in July, saying he hoped it would help spread information in the same way that health-warning labels on cigarette packs have.

Oh ffs.

quote:

Originally posted by airsoft guy:
Got ourselves another fight up here. They know they can't get it done through the legislature, so they're hoping to pass their horsesqueeze on through the initiative process.

https://saveoursecurity.net/

If you see signature gatherers, mark it here:
https://saveoursecurity.net/re...signature-gathering/

This is a very small part of a suit that is being composed at this time. I'm posting it because in my experience in trying to have the so-called pro-2nd community to fight a winning battle, I've found that they much rather shoot the messenger than to admit they've been bamboozled. I've edited a bit, but it contains some essential knowledge. You may want to talk to whatever group you may belong to, and ask the question as to why you choose to ignore the first 13 words of the amendment.

Start by examining our first principles of law by referring to what is considered the seminal document on the relationship between government and the People it serves. Our First Law, the Declaration of Independence, lays out how our government is formed, and its base duties to the People it serves. “We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter, or to abolish it…” (Emphasis added).
Move to the U.S. Constitution, which is the form and function of this Federal Republic. It is the unified instrument that makes declarations, and restrictions on both the Central and State governments; “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution…”
As many times as I have referred to, and examined the Constitution, I can find the word “necessary” in only one place. It is within the Second Amendment, which reads in part, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…” The Constitution does not claim, nor declare any other institution “necessary” except “the whole people”, organized, armed, and disciplined as “necessary to the security of a free State” in accordance with constitutionally compliant, and historical statutes. Clearly and fundamentally, the Constitution does not restrict the power of Militia, nor does it allow its dismantling, nor change of substance into anything other than “the whole people” as declared by“[w]hat *** those who framed and adopted [the Constitution] underst[oo]d [its] terms to designate and include”.
Clearly defined terms are twisted, and distorted by judicial wrangling, and legislative corruption designed to usurp what was created as a Constitutional Federal Republic wherein “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”
The powers, restrictions, and delegations of authorities cannot be changed by the simple act of a legislature. Every act must comply with the structure of the Constitution, and can only be changed through the amendment process.
Facts of Law and Historical Validation
The form, function, authorities, meanings, declarations, and restrictions laid out in the Constitution can only be changed by the amendment process prescribed at Article V, “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress…”
In the establishment of an uniform Federal Republic the tenets of the Constitution are compulsory on both the State and Central government, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 reads, “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States”. Further to secure the basis of liberty throughout the United States, and the obligation to adhere to the principles of Federalism Article VI, Clause 3 reads, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”.
The Constitution is a unified document that must be read in whole, not in parts, certainly not dissected, and unquestionably not interpreted to accommodate whims, fears, and agendas, nor can it be changed to reconcile statistics compiled on the back of distortions, dismantling, and corruption of Original Authorities. The Constitution certainly does not delegate an authority to reinterpret the words and meanings that were debated and agreed upon by the members of the ratifying convention. The Constitution must mean exactly what it says, or it means nothing at all. The law must be followed as it is written, and not by interpretations of government “officials” who have no authority to grant themselves extra special powers outside the clear wording of the Constitution. “[I]n expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force, and appropriate meaning, for it is evident from the whole instrument, that no word was unnecessarily used, or needlessly added. *** Every word appears to have been weighed with the utmost deliberation and its force and effect to have been fully understood.”
The Constitution is meant to be understood by all citizens as it was originally written; “[w]hat *** those who framed and adopted [the Constitution] underst[oo]d [its] terms to designate and include”, “the sense in which [the words were] generally used by those for whom the instrument was intended”, “the common parlance of the times in which the Constitution was written”, and the “accepted meaning [of the words] in that day.”
Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 provides, “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions”.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 provides, “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress” (Emphasis added).
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 provides, “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States…” (Emphasis added).
In order to make the continued function, and authority of Militia sacrosanct, the members of the ratifying convention included Amendment II in the Bill of Rights, which reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.
In corroboration of the tenets of the Constitution and in particular Militia, the New Jersey Constitution provides as follows:
1. Article 1, Section 3, Clause 1; “Provision for organizing, inducting, training, arming, disciplining and regulating a militia shall be made by law, which shall conform to applicable standards established for the armed forces of the United States.”
2. Article 1, Section 3, Clause 2; “The Governor shall nominate and appoint all general and flag officers of the militia, with the advice and consent of the Senate. All other commissioned officers of the militia shall be appointed and commissioned by the Governor according to law.”
3. Article 9, Section 3; “Upon the taking effect of this Constitution all officers of the militia shall retain their commissions subject to the provisions of Article V, Section 3.”
Militia Act of 1792, “I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside…”
An Act To promote the efficiency of the militia, and for other January 21,1903. “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the militia shall consist of every able-bodied male citizen of the respective States *** who is more than eighteen and less than forty-five years of age…”
Here are some facts of law, and quotes from U.S. v Miller that the pro-second community ignore, and actually disparage.

From Miller; “the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. *** show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense’.
Miller; “the militia system was based on the principle of the assize of arms. This implied the general obligation of all adult male inhabitants to possess arm”.
Miller; "Clauses intended to insure the possession of arms and ammunition by all who were subject to military service appear in all the important enactments concerning military affairs”.
Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 15: The Constitution grants to Congress the power "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions.”
Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 16: The Constitution requires “the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers”;
The Constitution requires “the States respectively *** the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.
The Militia was to remain intact, fully functional, and beyond the reach of the tyrant with “obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made”.
The Militia was to remain intact, fully functional, and beyond the reach of the tyrant, so with “obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made”.
10 U.S. Code § 246 – Composition of Militia; “The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States”.
10 U.S.C. § 332 provides that the President may call forth “the militia of any State *** to enforce those laws”.
10 U.S.C. § 333; “The President, by using the militia or the armed forces,
or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress,
in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—”;
Basically, the supposed pro-second groups, organizations, and people disregard what is the most fundamental part of the Amendment. It is one word that cannot be found anywhere else in the Constitution; “necessary”.

quote:

“We need to be open and honest about the harm that guns can cause,” McDermott said in a statement.

Golly gee snowflake, what about high sugar/sodium/fat diets, motor vehicles, the Medical profession, alcohol and illegal drugs?

Ya' think the above isn't harmful?

A "sanctuary city" from gun laws. I LOVE IT!!!

https://www.seattletimes.com/s...ty-from-new-gun-law/

‘I’m just standing up for people’s rights’: Police chief in tiny Republic says he won’t enforce new gun law

Originally published November 19, 2018 at 6:00 am
Updated November 19, 2018 at 9:27 am

The police chief of Republic, a tiny town in northeastern Washington, doesn’t think much of I-1639, the strict gun law state voters approved Nov. 6. Loren Culp won’t enforce it, and wants the City Council to pass an ordinance making Republic a “sanctuary city” against such laws.

By Erik Lacitis
Seattle Times staff reporter

The old, picturesque mining town of Republic in northeast Washington is 300 miles from Seattle, and a long, long ways from how Seattle folks think about issues. Like guns.

Loren Culp, the police chief in Republic, pop. 1,100, recently got a big shout-out from Ted Nugent, the “Cat Scratch Fever” rocker who these days is also known for his gun-rights and hard conservative views, and calls himself the “Motor City Madman.”

The reason for the shout-out was that Culp announced he wasn’t going to enforce Initiative 1639, the strict state gun-law measure passed Nov. 6.

On his Facebook page with 3.2 million followers, Nugent wrote, perhaps a bit hurriedly as he misspelled a word, “Chief Loren Culp is an Anerican freedom warrior. Godbless the freedom warriors.”

The initiative that goes into effect Jan. 1 is one of the toughest in the country, raising the legal age to buy a semi-automatic rifle to 21, from 18, and requiring enhanced background checks.

The initiative also includes a “safe storage” provision that, in some circumstances, makes firearm owners criminally liable if someone not allowed to access a gun uses it in a crime. That provision won’t apply if, say, a gun is stolen that was secured, such as in a safe, and the owner reports the incident within five days.

Not only is the chief — the entire Republic police force consists of Culp and a deputy — not going to enforce the law, but on Monday night, the City Council is going to take up for discussion an ordinance proposed by the chief.

He’s titled it the “2nd Amendment Sanctuary City Ordinance,” borrowing the “sanctuary” wording long used to describe places that limit how local law enforcement cooperates with federal immigration authorities.

The proposal certainly doesn’t mince its purpose.

First, it says that “all federal and State acts, laws, orders, rules or regulations regarding firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition are a violation of the 2nd Amendment.”

Then, it says that any such laws are “hereby declared to be invalid in the City of Republic.”

Culp says the response has been overwhelmingly positive from the locals.

Republic is in Ferry County, which voted 73 percent against the initiative, almost an exact flip from King County, which went 76 percent for the initiative.

As of Sunday afternoon, on the official “Republic Police WA” Facebook page, that Nov. 9 announcement by the chief had gotten 797 thumbs up, 292 hearts and only three sour faces.

An example of the comments is from Michelle from Bernice, California, “Wish we had your breed of man in kommifornia.”

On Sunday, the chief was featured on Fox News. “Only 2.5 million viewers this morning nothing to be nervous about,” Culp wrote on Facebook.

The reaction from the state Attorney General’s Office to the chief’s proposal has been curt: “We will review the city’s ordinance if it passes.” And, “We have nothing further to add at this time.”

Culp, 57, says it wasn’t his intention to get so much attention.

“I’m just standing up for people’s rights,” he says. “I had people asking if the Police Department was going to start arresting teenagers, 18-, 19-, 20-year-olds, carrying and using a semi-automatic .22 rifle. I told them, ‘I’m not going to infringe on someone’s constitutional rights.’”

Culp goes on, “A semi-automatic .22 rifle is used for teaching young kids marksmanship. It’s a common thing in rural areas. It doesn’t have much of a kick. It’s a small-caliber gun. And now it’s called an assault rifle?”

And as for having five days to report a stolen gun, he says, “So now you have to check your safe every five days to make sure it’s not been broken into, and make the inventory of guns is still correct? It’s ridiculous.”

Paul Kramer, who works in home renovation, is the citizen sponsor of I-1639. He was asked about the chief’s comments.

Kramer’s teenage son was injured in a 2016 Mukilteo house-party shooting that left three others dead. The shooter in that instance was a 19-year-old who bought an AR-15 rifle about a week before the attack.

“An 18- to 20-year-old can legally purchase a firearm,” he says. But with I-1639, “They can’t legally purchase a semi-automatic weapon, just like they can’t legally purchase a handgun. They’re still able to purchase a bolt-action, pump-action, slide-action shotgun.”

As for somebody stealing a gun from a safe, Kramer says, “It’s improbable anybody else is going into their gun safe.”

Elbert Koontz, 72, is the mayor of Republic. He says he can’t think of anyone in town who thinks the chief’s proposal is a bad idea.

No liberals at all who came out for I-1639?

“Most of the town’s liberals still believe in the Second Amendment,” he says. “They’re mostly worried about building stuff for people that want to ride bikes.”


These days, the town’s website touts its outdoor activities such as ATV trails, fishing, hunting, snowshoeing and even fossil digging. The gold-mining boom days are long gone.

Koontz says the only negative comments he’s received are from the Seattle area. “Texting me. You guys are evil. Fire the police chief immediately. That kind of thing.”

He was asked if the city was prepared for possible litigation involving their proposed ordinance, and the cost involved.

“We’re a small town, you know. There are two people in City Hall, three, counting me. I don’t know what will happen. It’s up to the City Council,” he says.

Ulrich Semrau, 68, who holds an unusual title in Republic, and, actually, any town in this country, talks about why it might become a gun sanctuary.

He is Republic’s “official resident City Philosopher,” says the town’s website.

A few years ago, says Semrau, a retired psychoanalyst who’s lived there for 20 years, “the City Council was having a bad week and I decided to make them laugh a little bit.”

In 2016, the council gave him the official title. On many days, Semrau can be found at the Republic Brewing Co., ready to dispense philosophy.


“People who live here are very individualistic, probably fairly libertarian,” he says. “People don’t want anybody telling them what they can do. My position is that we need to ask a different question. If we take the assumption that guns are a right, how do we, as a society, keep them out of the hands of someone who’s not mentally stable?”

Monday night’s City Council meeting has been switched to a large room at the high school, as the mayor expects a large turnout.

Even with no ordinance, the police chief says of enforcement of I-1639, arrests are at “the officer’s discretion” unless it’s a violent felony.

And just so it’s perfectly clear, Culp posted, “As long as I am Chief of Police, no Republic Police Officer will infringe on a citizens right to keep and Bear Arms, PERIOD!”

Loud enough to reach all the way to Seattle.

Erik Lacitis: 206-464-2237 or elacitis@seattletimes.com; on Twitter: @ErikLacitis.
View 456 Comments

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:
A "sanctuary city" from gun laws. I LOVE IT!!!

If they get rid of state preemption, gun owners will be 'confined' to places like Republic.

Boss

So it does or does not apply to pistols? I’m seeing stuff on other forums that it applies to pistols now, which neatly handles “other” lowers. This is beyond a goat-rope at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
So it does or does not apply to pistols? I’m seeing stuff on other forums that it applies to pistols now, which neatly handles “other” lowers. This is beyond a goat-rope at this point.

1639 specifically was about non-existant but now legally defined [cue evil voiice] semi automatic assault rifles!!! but some aspects of it, such as BGC could possibly be stretched to impact things like pistols.

But don't worry, in a few weeks, the Olympia will be all over fixing those 'loop holes.'

Boss

Well, one good thing came from the I-1639 crap. I finally got off the fence and ordered up my “Holy Grail” rifle.

M1A Loaded with stainless barrel and walnut stock has been ordered and is now in queue for cleaning on arrival sometime next week.

Believe Chief Culp is on Tucker Carlson tomorrow/ Friday (11/30).

https://www.google.com/amp/ins...om/amp/article/64095

Boss