141204_initiative_594_group_660

TTAG reader Craig Moslander writes:

Here in Washington (the state), I 594 has now gone into effect. People haven’t even figured out all the ways it makes you a criminal yet (e.g. it may cover flare guns, percussive nail guns, etc, due to its definition of “firearm”). And yet here we are, full speed ahead down the slippery slope: Initiative 594 group calls for additional gun measures [via komonews.com]. The antis now want . . .

a safe storage law, a gun violence protection order (no due process) and state gun range inspections (for lead content). Singing the same old song.

“These policies enshrine the belief that gun responsibility is part and parcel of gun ownership and completely consistent with our Second Amendment rights,” he said. “Responsible gun ownership and use, in fact, help protect Second Amendment rights.”

When asked if any of the nine people who made the presentation were gun owners, two, including Brown, said they were former gun owners but none currently owned guns.

The antis will never be satisfied until guns are banned, confiscated, and we are all defenseless, hapless victims depending on state protection. “We aren’t coming for your guns” they say. Not today, but here in Washington we’re on the highway to Hell with a bus full of wealthy elitists asking, “are we there yet?”

As they say, we can never rest.

Recommended For You

57 Responses to Washington I-594 Background Check Bill Goes Into Effect. Now What?

  1. If they ever succeed in banning legal gun ownership, next they go after martial arts schools and get them banned. Any act of self reliance and self protection cannot be allowed.

    • No, I bet you the Antis can go even further than that. Knowledge of self protection/defense is banned too, so now anyone knowledgeable about it must be put in prison or closely monitored by the government.

      But wait, people can learn from electronic media! Restrict the use of the internet and ban movies and video games!

      It could get worse, knowledge can be transferred via writing! The antis can then ban books and writing. All writing must be approved by the state, Comrade Commisar!

      This is the Antigunners dream come true, and if you are a reader of this site, this is probably your nightmare as well as mine.

    • It’s much easier than that. They can just criminalize self-defense, as they’ve done in most of Europe. If they ring up anybody who uses any tool (including their fists) to defend themselves, then people can go fool around in their dojos all they want, just don’t anybody dare try to use it against the protected criminal class.

  2. “The antis will never be satisfied until guns are banned, confiscated, and we are all defenseless, hapless victims depending on state protection”-RF Well said except I think the intent is to keep the criminal element, especially organized and gang crime, well armed. They do want the disappearing, law abiding middle classes to become defenseless and scared.

  3. As an Oregon citizen I’m watching what the response in Washington state is as this
    state is filled with clueless Democrat leaning Peoples Republic of Kalifornia
    refugees. I would argue that I-594 is very specific in its objective and actually
    very precise in its objective….to make using a firearm as difficult and uncertain
    and possible and to prevent legally firearms education and familiarization so
    the next generation will be happy to turn their firearms in without hesitation.
    Its a no brainier really. Only MASS refusal will suffice…..this IS the red line
    everybody talks about but then seems to think we won’t reach. How very
    wrong you are….

    • “…to make using a firearm as difficult and uncertain
      and possible and to prevent legally firearms education and familiarization so
      the next generation will be happy to turn their firearms in without hesitation.
      Its a no brainier really.”
      Bullseye. The tactic is clear for those who are willing to look, TPTB realize they will not be able to dismantle the 2A with the older generations today, but realize that they can make it incrementally more and more difficult, always keeping gun owners on their heels in fear of growing compliance. They also realize that if they control the minds of the younger generations, they can easily phase out the 2A as kids are brought up thinking guns are illegal and evil, except in government hands. The zero tolerance policies are a direct application of this strategy.

  4. That photo makes me cringe. It reminds me of everything I read about the temperance movement. Bunch of wealthy ‘holier than thou’ old hens. Only difference is that these cluckers worship the state.

  5. Well well, yet another State within which my industry resides that I cannot. Telecommuting is looking more and more like my only option.

  6. They now want… a safe storage law, a gun violence protection order (no due process) and state gun range inspections (for lead content).

    Just think of this as “The Bloomberg Package.” It’s been the pattern in every successful Bloomberg-bought referendum so far. He said he would do this when he lost Chicago and the midterms. It’s time to get it in peoples faces BIG TIME.

    Beware, Oregon. Beware.

  7. I laugh when they trot out that old, tired line “we’re not going to take away your guns” . I really do. Right in their faces. Then, I point out all the people who do, and watch them stumble and stammer and run away.

    Fmr. President William J. Clinton does.

    “And we should — then every community in the country could then start doing major weapon sweeps and then destroying the weapons, not selling them.”

    “When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans …And so a lot of people say there’s too much personal freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it. That’s what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about how we’re going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities.” – MTV’s “Enough is Enough!”, 22 March, 1994

    “We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…” – USA Today, 11 March, 1993, pg. 2A

    “If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.” – 12 August, 1993

    “You know the one thing that’s wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say.” – From his speech in Philadelphia PA City Hall Courtyard, 28 May, 1993

    “There is no reason for anyone in this country – anyone except a police officer or military person – to buy, to own, to have, to use a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns.” – While signing The Brady Bill, 1993

    “The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people.” – MTV, 1993

    “I feel very strongly about it [the Brady Bill]. I think – I also associate myself with the other remarks of the Attorney General. I think it’s the beginning. It’s not the end of the process by any means.” – 11 August, 1993

    Senator Dianne Feinstein (D – CA) does.

    “Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.” – Associated Press, 18 November, 1993.

    “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them; “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.” – 60 Minutes on CBS, 5 February, 1995.

    “The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.”

    Senator Frank Launtenberg (D – NJ) did.

    “We have other legislation that all of you are aware that I have been so active on, with my colleagues here, and that is to shut down the gun shows.”

    He died in 2013.

    Fmr. Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D – OH) did.

    “No, we’re not looking at how to control criminals … we’re talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.” – Constitution Subcommittee, 2 February, 1989

    “I don’t care about crime, I just want to get the guns.”

    “What good does it do to ban some guns. All guns should be banned.”

    He died in 2008.

    Fmr. Representative Charles Pashayan (R – CA) does.

    “All of this has to be understood as part of a process leading ultimately to a treaty
    that will give an international body power over our domestic laws.” – United Nations Small Arms Conference, 2001

    Fmr. Senator John Chafee (R – RI) did.

    “I shortly will introduce legislation banning the sale, manufacture or possession of handguns (with exceptions for law enforcement and licensed target clubs)… . It is time to act. We cannot go on like this. Ban them!” – Minneapolis Star Tribune pg. 31A, 15 June, 1992

    He died in 1999.

    Then-Senator (now Vice President) Joe “Buckshot” Biden (D – DE) does.

    “Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.” – Associated Press, 11 November, 1993

    Representative Jan Schakowski (D – IL) does.

    “I believe…..this is my final word……I believe that I’m supporting the Constitution of the United States which does not give the right for any individual to own a handgun….” – Recorded 25 June, 2000 by Matt Beauchamp

    “We want everything on the table. This is a moment of opportunity. There’s no question about it…We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the–you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.” – The Global Dispatch, 12 March, 2013.

    http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/illinois-rep-jan-schakowsky-says-assault-rifle-ban-just-the-beginning-moment-of-opportunity-and-seeks-to-ban-handguns-70067/

    http://youtu.be/BVz2lHODQvs – Interview by Jason Mattera

    Fmr. Representative Major Owens (D – NY) did.

    “We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing and import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.”

    “Mr. Speaker, my bill prohibits the importation, exportation, manufacture, sale, purchase, transfer, receipt, possession, or transportation of handguns and handgun ammunition. It establishes a 6-month grace period for the turning in of handguns.” – Congressional Record, 10 November, 1993

    He died in 2013.

    Representative Bobby Rush (D – IL) does.

    “My staff and I right now are working on a comprehensive gun-control bill. We don’t have all the details, but for instance, regulating the sale and purchase of bullets. Ultimately, I would like to see the manufacture and possession of handguns banned except for military and police use. But that’s the endgame. And in the meantime, there are some specific things that we can do with legislation.”

    Fmr. Representative Craig Anthony Washington (D – TX) does.

    “This is not all we will have in future Congresses, but this is a crack in the door. There are too many handguns in the hands of citizens. The right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with the Brady Bill.” – Mark-up hearing on The Brady Bill, 10 April, 1991

    Fmr. Massachusetts State Governor and State House Representative Michael Dukakis (D) does.

    “I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by [the] police and military. I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state.”

    Fmr. Representative Henry Waxman (D – CA) does.

    “If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all.”

    Fmr. Representative William Lacy Clay, Sr. (D – MO) does.

    “The Brady Bill is the minimum step Congress should take…we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns, except in a few cases.” – St. Louis Dispatch, 6 May, 1991

    Senator Charles Ellis Schumer (D – NY) does.

    “We’re here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true! … We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy. We’re going to beat guns into submission!” – NBC Nightly News, 30 November, 1993

    Representative Shiela Jackson Lee (D – TX) does.

    “I would personally just say to those who are listening, maybe you want to turn in your guns.”

    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) does.

    “I’m personally all for taxing guns to pay for health care coverage.”

    Vermont State Senator Mary Ann Carlson (D) does.

    “We must be able to arrest people before they commit crimes. By registering guns and knowing
    who has them we can do that. If they have guns they are pretty likely to commit a crime.”

    Colorado State Senator (and Majority Leader) John Morse (D) does.

    “People who own guns are essentially a sickness in our souls who must be cleansed.”

    New Jersey State Senators Loretta Weinberg, Sandra Cunningham, and Linda Greenstein all do.

    “We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate… They don’t care about the bad guys. All they want to do is have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.”

    http://www.examiner.com/article/open-mike-reveals-n-j-senators-contempt-for-gun-owners-confiscation-goal

    Fmr. California State Senator Leeland Yee (D) does.

    “It is extremely important that individuals in the state of California do not own assault weapons. I mean that is just so crystal clear, there is no debate, no discussion.” – CBS San Francisco, 20 May, 2012, before he was arrested and charged with gun-trafficking, taking bribes, money laundering, and official corruption on 24 March, 2014.

    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/05/20/cbs-5-story-inspires-new-legislation-to-ban-bullet-button/

    http://www.sfgate.com/file/757/757-complaint_affidavit_14-70421-nc.pdf

    United States Attorney General Eric B. Holder does.

    “[We have to have] as part of the gun initiative, though, an informational campaign to really change the hearts and minds of people in Washington, D.C., and in particular our young people. They are saturated with guns in media and entertainment, [and] by the entertainment industry with violence, and I think too many of our young people, in particular our young men are fascinated with violence and in particular with guns. And what we need to do is change the way people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that’s not acceptable, that’s not hip, to carry a gun anymore.

    In the way we changed out attitudes about cigarettes, y’know, when I was growing up people smoked all the time. I mean, both my parents did. But, over time we changed the way people thought about smoking, and so now why have people who cower outside of buildings and kinda’ smoke in private and don’t want to admit it. And I think that’s what we need to do with guns.
    … One thing that I think is clear with young people, and with adults as well, is that we jut have to be repetitive about this. It’s not enough to simply have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it every Monday. We need to do this every day of the week, and really just brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.” – C-SPAN2, 1995

    Fmr. United States Attorney General Janet “Waco” Reno does.

    “Gun registration is not enough.” – On ABC’s “Good Morning America”, 10 December, 1993

    “Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.”

    Fmr. Director of the ATF John Magaw does.

    “The truth is, [handguns] are used to assassinate people, to kill people, because they are very easily concealed, you can drop them in any pocket.” – When interviewed by ABC’s Day One correspondent John McKenzie.

    Boston Police Commissioner William Evans does.

    “Having long guns – rifles and shotguns – especially here in the city of Boston, I think we should have, as the local authority, some say in the matter. For the most part, nobody in the city needs a shotgun. Nobody needs a rifle.” – Boston Public Radio, 23 July, 2013

    Fmr. Chief of Police for Los Angeles, California Bernard Parks does.

    “We would get rid of assault weapons. There would not be an assault weapon in the United States, whether it’s for show or someone having it in a collection.” – Reuters, 9 June, 2000

    Fmr. New York City Police Commissioner Patrick V. Murphy did.

    “We are at the point in time and terror where nothing short of a strong uniform policy of domestic disarmament will alleviate the danger which is crystal clear and perilously present. Let us take the guns away from the people. Exemptions should be limited to the military, the police, and those licensed for good and sufficient reasons. And I would look forward to the day when it would not be necessary for the policeman to carry a sidearm.” – Testimony before the National Association of Citizen Crime Commissions.

    He died in 2011.

    Fmr. San Jose Police Chief Joseph McNamara does.

    “My experience as a street cop suggests that most merchants should not have guns. But I feel even stronger about the average person having them…most homeowners…simply have no need to own guns.”

    East Palo Alto Police Detective Rod Tuason does.

    “Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night. Should’ve pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement … 2 weeks off!!!”

    He is currently being investigated for ethics violations.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/02/14/gun-rights-advocates-target-california-detective-following-facebook-posts/

    Branford, Connecticut Police Officer Joseph Peterson does.

    “I [would] give my left nut to bang down your door and come for your gun.” Those are his exact words to a long-time “friend” of his . . .

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/10/officer-reportedly-tells-citizen-i-give-my-left-n-to-bang-down-your-door-and-come-for-your-gun/

    Connecticut Superior Court Judge Robert C. Brunetti does.

    “No one in this country should have guns. I never return guns.”

    http://www.examiner.com/article/connecticut-judge-declares-no-one-should-have-guns

    Connecticut Superior Court Judge Edward Mullarkey does, too.

    “Those who support the Second Amendment should be ashamed.”

    http://ctcarry.com/News/Release/631a41bd-55f3-4b63-9644-c79617bd54d9

    New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) does.

    “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.” – New York Times, 21 December, 2012

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/nyregion/cuomo-says-he-will-outline-gun-measures-next-month.html?_r=0

    Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel does.

    “We’re bending the law as far as we can to ban an entirely new class of guns.”

    Fmr. Stockton, CA Mayor Barbara Fass does.

    “I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about. Is that it will happen one very small step at a time so that by the time, um, people have woken up, quote, to what’s happened, it’s gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the banning of semi-assault military weapons that are military weapons, not household weapons, is the first step.”

    Deborah Prothrow-Stith, Office of Government and Community Programs and the Community Violence Prevention Project at the Harvard School of Public Health, does.

    “My own view on gun control is simple: I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anybody would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned.”

    Chester M. Pierce, Fmr. Harvard psychiatrist, does.

    “Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well by creating the international child of the future.” – Speaking as an “expert” in public education, 1973 International Education Seminar

    Fmr. Chancellor of Boston University John Silber did.

    “I don’t believe anybody has a right to own any kind of a firearm. I believe in order to obtain a permit to own a firearm, that person should undergo an exhaustive criminal background check. In addition, an applicant should give up his right to privacy and submit his medical records for review to see if the person has ever had a problem with alcohol, drugs or mental illness . . . The Constitution doesn’t count!”

    He died in 2012.

    Sarah Brady, fmr. Chairman of Handgun Control Inc. (now The Brady Campaign) does.

    “…I don’t believe gun owners have rights.” – Hearst Newspapers, October 1997

    “The House passage of our bill is a victory for this country! Common sense wins out. I’m just so thrilled and excited. The sale of guns must stop. Halfway measures are not enough.” – 1 July, 1988

    “We must get rid of all the guns.” – Speaking on behalf of HCI, with Sheriff Jay Printz (of Printz v. U.S. fame no less!), “The Phil Donahue Show”, September, 1994

    “The only reason for guns in civilian hands is for sporting purposes.” – Tampa Tribune, 21 October, 1991

    James Brady, husband of Sarah Brady, did.

    “For target shooting, that’s okay. Get a license and go to the range. For defense of the home, that’s why we have police departments.” – Parade Magazine, 26 June, 1994

    He died in 2014.

    Nelson T. “Pete” Shields, Sarah Brady’s predecessor at HCI, does.

    “Our ultimate goal – total control of handguns in the United States – is going to take time…The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced…The second problem is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of handguns and all handgun ammunition –except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors– totally illegal.” – The New Yorker Magazine, 26 July, 1976, pg. 53F

    Josh Sugarmann, Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center, does.

    “Americans are ready to hate somebody, and it’s going to be the gun industry.” – Newsweek Magazine, 16 ay, 1994

    “The word ‘hate’ is a very carefully chosen word. There’s got to be a real sense of revulsion and disgust. People are looking for someone to blame, someone who’s the cause of their problems, and it should be the gun industry. These guys are the living embodiment of the slogan, ‘Guns don’t kill people-people kill people’. They’re complete mercenaries.” – The New American Magazine, 13 June, 1994

    “A gun-control movement worthy of the name would insist that President Clinton move beyond his proposals for controls … and immediately call on Congress to pass far-reaching industry regulation like the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act … [which] would give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns.”

    “We need to ratchet down the firepower in civilian hands. We need to get assault weapons off our streets and off the gun store shelves … We should ban handguns.” – “NRA’s “really big problem”: Why it’s dependent on a dwindling fringe”, Salon.com, 13 June, 2014.

    http://www.salon.com/2014/06/13/nras_really_big_problem_why_its_dependent_on_a_dwindling_fringe/

    Michael K. Beard, Fmr President of The Coalition To Stop Gun Violence, does.

    “Our goal is to not allow anybody to buy a handgun. In the meantime, we think there ought to be strict licensing and regulation.” – The Washington Times, 9 December, 1993

    Shannon Watts, head of Moms Demand Action, does.

    “I’ll be pretty clear on this. @MikeBloomberg and I want guns gone. Period. It doesn’t matter what it takes.” – From Twitter, 10 June, 2014

    “Banning assault weapons. If you ban the assault weapons listed in the (Sen. Dianne) Feinstein bill, you would still have 2,000 firearms to choose from.”

    Time Magazine does.

    “As you probably know by now, Time’s editors, in the April 13 issue, took a strong position in support of an outright ban on handguns for private use.” – Letter to the NRA, 24 April, 1981

    The New York Times does.

    “The only way to discourage the gun culture is to remove the guns from the hands and shoulders of people who are not in the law enforcement business.” – Unsigned editorial, 24 September, 1975

    The Washington Post does.

    “The sale, manufacture, and possession of handguns ought to be banned…We do not believe the 2nd Amendment guarantees an individual the right to keep them.” – “Legal Guns Kill Too”, 5 November, 1999

    The Star-Ledger Editorial Board does.

    “So do all the voluntary gun buybacks you want. But until they are mandatory, and our society can see past its hysteria over “gun confiscation,” don’t expect it to make much difference.” – “What N.J. really needs is mandatory gun buybacks: Editorial”, 19 September, 2014

    Michael Gartner, Fmr. President of NBC News, does.

    “There is no reason for anyone in this country, for anyone except a police officer or a military person, to buy, to own, to have, to use, a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to change the Constitution.” – USA Today, “Glut of Guns: What Can We Do About Them?”, 16 January, 1992

    Charles Krauthammer, a nationally syndicated columnist, does.

    “In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea . . . . Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.” – From “Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet.”, The Washington Post, 5 April, 1996

    “I have no problem in principle with gun control. Congress enacted (and I supported) an assault weapons ban in 1994. The problem was: It didn’t work. (So concluded a University of Pennsylvania study commissioned by the Justice Department.) The reason is simple. Unless you are prepared to confiscate all existing firearms, disarm the citizenry and repeal the Second Amendment, it’s almost impossible to craft a law that will be effective.” – From “The root of mass-murder.”, The Washington Post, 20 December, 2012

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-roots-of-mass-murder/2012/12/20/e4d99594-4ae3-11e2-b709-667035ff9029_story.html

    Molly Ivan, another nationally syndicated columnist, does.

    “Ban the damn things. Ban them all. You want protection? Get a dog.” – 19 July, 1994

    Gerald Ensely, of the Tallahassee Democrat, does.

    “How is it that the supposed greatest nation on earth refuses to stop the unholy availability of guns? I’m not talking about gun control. I’m not talking about waiting periods and background checks. I’m talking about flat-out banning the possession of handguns and assault rifles by individual citizens. I’m talking about repealing or amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Gun freaks say if you take away their guns only outlaws will have guns. That’s a chance worth taking. Because if we ban guns, eventually the tide will turn. It might take 10 years or 20 years. Hell, it might take 50 years. But if we make it illegal to own a handgun, eventually there will be no handguns.

    Those of us who think widespread handgun ownership is insane need to keep speaking up. We need to teach our children handguns are wrong. We need to support any measure that limits their availability — and work to repeal the Second Amendment. We need to keep marching forward until someday this nation becomes civilized enough to ban guns. One of the frequent refrains of gun freaks about President Obama is “He’s coming for our guns.” Obama never said such a thing. But I will:
    We’re coming for your guns. And someday, we’ll take them.” — In “Stop the insanity: Ban guns”, 23 Bovember, 2014

    “Professor” Dean Morris, Director of the Law Enforcement Assistance Association does.

    “I am one who believes that as a first step, the United States should move expeditiously to disarm the civilian population, other than police and security officers, of all handguns, pistols, and revolvers…No one should have the right to anonymous ownership or use of a gun.”

    J. Elliot Corbett, Secretary of the National Council for Responsible Firearms Policy, does.

    “We are now supporting the President’s bill which provides stringent restrictions on rifles and shotguns. We shall also get behind the bill which provides for national registration and licensing. I personally believe handguns should be outlawed.” – 17 June, 1968

    “Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed.” – Interviewed for the Washington Evening Star, 19 September, 1969

    Rosie O’Donnell does.

    “I think there should be a law — and I know this is extreme — that no one can have a gun in the U.S. If you have a gun, you go to jail. Only the police should have guns.” – Ottawa Sun, 29 April, 1999

    “I don’t care if you want to hunt, I don’t care if you think it’s your right. I say, sorry, you are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison.” – The Rosie O’Donnell Show, 19 April, 1999.

    The American Civil “Liberties” Union does.

    “We urge passage of federal legislation … to prohibit … the private ownership and possession of handguns.” – National ACLU Policy #47, adopted by its Board of Directors in Semptember, 1976

    The United Nations does.

    “Tighten controls on the gun trade in the United States and other member nations.” – UN Disarmament Commission

    Poughkeepsie, NY Mayor John Tkayik (R) knows the truth.

    “I’m no longer a member of MAIG. Why? It did not take long to realize that MAIG’s agenda was much more than ridding felons of illegal guns; that under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.”

    He is currently running for New York State Senator, 41st District.

    Sioux City, MO Mayor Bob Scott knows the truth, too.

    “I was never an active member. They’re not just against illegal guns, they’re against all guns.”

    So does Madeira Beach, FL Mayor Patricia Shontz.

    “I am withdrawing because I believe the MAIG is attempting to erode all gun ownership, not just illegal guns. Additionally, I have learned that the MAIG may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership. It appears the MAIG has misrepresented itself to the Mayors of America and its citizens. This is gun control, not crime prevention.”

    Nashua, NH Mayor Donnalee Lozeau knows.

    “I simply cannot be part of an organization that chooses this course of action instead of cooperatively working with those that have proven over a lifetime of work their true intentions.”

    Edgewood, KY Mayor John D. Link found out.

    “Sometime ago, I attended a meeting with many city officials from throughout the United States. At this meeting there was a table with the title “Mayors Against Illegal Guns.” Not wanting illegal guns, I signed the form not knowing what kind of spin would ensue. As it turned out, I was against the 2nd amendment, etc. I have since been removed from the “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” movement. On our city website I have a letter to all stating my position. I’m not against the NRA, guns, or hunting, and never will be.”

    Oldmans Township, NJ Mayor Harry Moore knows better now.

    “It is simply unconscionable that this coalition, under your [Michael Bloomberg’s] leadership, would call for a repeal of the Shelby/Tiahrt amendment that helps to safeguard criminal investigations and the lives of law enforcement officers, witnesses, and others by restricting access to firearms trace data solely to law enforcement. How anyone, least of all a public official, could be willing to sacrifice such a law enforcement lifeline in order to gain an edge in suing an industry they have political differences with is repugnant to me. The fact that your campaign against this protective language consisted of overheated rhetoric, deception, and falsehoods is disturbing.”

    I could go on literally for days and days, listing pages upon pages of people saying exactly how and why they’re coming for our guns. Not a single bit of it could ever be supported, defended, or refuted by them, either.

    • For crying out loud, post a link, don’t quote the entire encyclopedia. We get the idea. This is a waste of bandwidth.

      John Davies
      Spokane WA USA

      • Actually, I appreciate it. Its a good reference, useful to give to a genuinely thoughtful newb to guns, who brings a question, or objection, and a fact pattern with cites is your most credible answer.

        Anyone who has been involved with guns and gun rights already gets it. This is not just a den of cigar chomping, whiskey swilling, ofwg’s arguing about thd best caliber for home defense (obv .40 S&W) but is so much more to a much wider and diverse audience (most of whom get the self-deprecating snark on the long discredited progtard ad hominem…..;)

        Theres more in the tabs above, including some basics on UBCs in Gun Facts, that is relevant to this I594 lede…

      • It’s about time some one showed all the FACTS. Liberal Progressive Marxists can’t stand facts. Apparently, you are one of them and are an enemy of America. WE THE PATRIOT PEOPLE have read the Constitution, the bill of rights and the Federalist Papers and we will carry out our duty to protect the United States Of America. The term {United States} means just that, and that is, they are all united and a member of America as one nation. We the patriot people are the ones that will keep the states united and throw out any and all tyrants trying to “HOPE and CHANGE” America. If I was as as stupid as your Mr. Grubber says that you are ,I would keep my friggin mouth closed instead of standing up and shouting , “Oh, look at me I am so stupid”, to the whole world.

    • The gall of that horndog. Personal liberty cannot be abused, ding so crossed the line into exerting power over others.

      Woo-sah…woo-sah. TTAG is bad for the blood pressure sometimes.

  8. The law doesn’t mention parts. Nor does it specify that one component legally counts as the firearm (like federal law does). So disassemble the firearm, transfer the parts, then show the recipient how to assemble them.

  9. At face value, it would seem to me that state gun range inspections (for lead content) would be a good idea. Because I have heard that people who work at a range tend to have higher blood lead levels.

    Can someone educate me on this issue?

    • It’s only harmful to those who voluntarily enter the range (and even then not an issue unless you lick the shooting tables).

      The state has no more authority to regulate the lead level at a range than it does to restrict smoking in bars or restaurants. The only reason for lead restrictions would be to shut down ranges for health reasons.

    • “…Because I have heard that people who work at a range tend to have higher blood lead levels.”

      Wearing gloves will take care of that.

      • “Wearing gloves will take care of that.”
        Washing your hands & face will also take care of that as well. Pack some wet wipes and your good to go.

    • Depending on type of range and ammo used, blood level tests for lead could be forced under OSHA for employees of the range. (This is why most indoor ranges outright forbid non-jacketed ammo, it produces a cloud of lead vapor/particles that is trapped inside where everyone is stuck breathing it).

      I think they were looking more toward environmental though, you know, soil testing so they could try and ban lead bullets.

  10. Hmm… I would have rather that they had passed a California style storage than I-594. At least then it is near impossible to actually convict anyone of a crime.

    I think the intent is to pass anything that discourages gun ownership

  11. Life is what it is, their showing up on my doorstep or stopping me on the street is when the reckoning begins.

  12. Not only are the anti’s self-righteous in their assurance that they are right, they are self-congratulatory in their own opinion of themselves. And they say gun owners are the people America needs to worry about?

  13. Some states, like Florida, prohibit registration, which makes “universal background checks” meaningless.

    As for Washington,

  14. Say I live in Washington State and have a brother that moved, suddenly, to Hawaii. Said brother left his shotgun here in my safe, to keep it safe. He owns it, it’s registered and purchased in his name legally. He is sane and I am sane.

    What say any of you (I know you aren’t lawers and offer no legal advice) regarding I594 and this safe storage of my bro’s beloved Winchester? Would I now be a felon?

    • Most likely. Don’t forget that laws lie this aren’t intended to be enforced exactly as written. That’s impossible, add they tend to be written vaguely. The purpose is to create an excuse to arrest and prosecute forcing you to defend yourself in court, and sue to retrieve any property that is taken, if you are acquitted by 12 people who can’t get out of jury duty.

    • In my opinion [IANAL], as this first “transfer” occurred before the law became effective, no violation of that law has occurred. Now if your brother returns for a visit and you hand him his firearm this is an illegal “transfer” under the law and this transfer is a misdemeanor. When the firearm is returned to your safe that constitutes a second illegal “transfer” and now you are both felons.

      To “fix” this under I594 I would ignore the misdemeanor and before your brother returns the firearm to your safekeeping, have him transfer the firearm to you via a background check at your friendly local FFL. Wash, rinse, and repeat for subsequent visits until he takes back permanent possession.

      That is assuming you want to pay any attention to this crappy law.

    • “What say any of you (I know you aren’t lawers and offer no legal advice)”

      More than a few lawyers regularly post in the comments here. Prosecutors, criminal defense, corporate, and retired.

      That said, take anything you read here with the appropriate grain of salt and ask one licensed in your area for your specific advice.

  15. Illinois requires a gun transfer to be approved by the State Police in a private sale. If approved the seller will get an approval number that must be retained by the seller for 10 years.

  16. “Illinois requires a gun transfer to be approved by the State Police in a private sale.”

    This is the game that is played when you purchase a firearm from a non-FFL at an
    Oregon gun show after an anti-gun initiative passed here several years ago.
    You get the pleasure of registering your gun with the State Police (and with finger
    prints to…cool) as part of the “background check”. The anti-freedom clowns and
    government statists may not (yet) pass another AWB but with I-594’s mandatory
    gun registration that is no longer necessary. Getting the guns registered for
    future confiscation is more critical. State Police in Oregon get caught all the time
    trolling through those registration forms to harass gun owners and I no longer buy
    or trade guns at gun shows.

  17. What next? Washington State becomes the petri dish for what happens to an ignorant progtard urban metro, when the the true intentions of the Elites are revealed. Didnt take long for them to gleefully pi$$ in the petri dish, did it?

    Enjoy the decline!

    Free States, take note.

  18. This is going to backfire on the anti-gun crowd just on simple economics alone. Since selling a used gun is going to be a hassle people are just going to purchase new. The demand for new guns will rise, then prices will fall due to increased competition.

    The end result is you’re going to have more guns in circulation since the used guns will be retained instead of being sold, the exact opposite of what the Brady Bunch and Moms Demanding Attention are hoping for.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *