Posted on 11/09/2014 2:26:34 PM PST by marktwain
Photo by Dave Workman
I-594 in Washington State is a horribly written initiative. It consists of 18 page of legalese that seems more intent on trapping legal gun owners than on reducing violent crime. Yet, it passed with almost 60% of the vote. How did this happen? I-594 (pdf) link. Here is an analysis of the initiative by David Kopel.
There is a long history of disarmist initiatives that have started with strong majority support in the polling, that find on election day the support has evaporated and they lose by large margins. I had some hope that this might happen in Washington State with I-594. It did not. Here are the reasons that I believe that second amendment supporters lost this fight.
1. The disarmists had millions of dollars to use, funded by Michael Bloomberg's Moms Demand Action, now Everytown for Gun Sense, and millions more donated by Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Paul Allen, and Nick Hanauer.
Data reported by the Public Disclosure Commission indicates that these five men, and their spouses, contributed more than half of the total $10.3 million raised to pass I-594. Other wealthy Seattle-area elitists have added considerably more to the pot.This bought saturation of the airwaves and mailboxes with highly deceptive ads. It was a very well designed and effective campaign, aimed at the majority of people who do not understand the law well.
Todays Daily Olympian carries a story asserting that controversial Initiative 594 doesnt create a gun registry, while yesterdays Everett Herald endorsed the 18-page gun control measure, and Saturdays Seattle Times carries an op-ed piece touting I-594s passage.To reinforce this view, David Workman characterizes this report by the Seattle Times as an October Surprise:
That doesnt count the KCPQ true/false critique of television advertisements that labels an advertisement for Initiative 591 mostly false while saying a competing ad for I-594 is mostly true. Perhaps the negative reaction from readers to all of these is a strong indication that a growing number of Evergreen State voters are crying foul about what they believe is biased press coverage of the dueling initiatives campaign.
The Seattle Times recommended a No vote on I-591 back on July 5, while endorsing rival Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control measure. Todays story on the I-591 campaign claim that I-591 is supported by law enforcement in the form of two major organizations, the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs (WACOPS) and Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association (WSLEFIA) is dubbed half true by the newspapers Truth Needle.The old media was careful to avoided mentioning law enforcement opposition:
The I-591 campaign has been running at a severe disadvantage, outspent nine or ten-to-one, overwhelmed by the I-594 $10.1 million war chest. But they have active-duty law enforcement overwhelmingly on their side, a fact that the gun control crowd has danced around, and most of the mainstream press has almost religiously avoided reporting.
After 18 months of reporting and editorializing, and not until the day after the election, did the headlines acknowledge today what gun rights activists have been saying so long about Initiative 594: Its a gun control measure, as affirmed by the Seattle Times and Seattle P-I.com.3. The strategy to defeat I-594 centered around offering a substitute initiative, I-591. Most of the effort was spent on promoting I-591. That did not correct the deception that was being promoted with I-594. Only about $600,000 was spent on getting out information debunking the I-594 ads. That was about 6% of what was spent promoting I-594, which does not count the millions in unpaid support it was given by the old media. It was nowhere near enough. Most voters never heard or read any opposition. Here is a personal report from examiner.com commenter, Difranco:
Dave. After spending two weeks doorbelling in southern Thurston county then spending 22 days in eastern WA hunting for deer and elk. Almost every hunter / gun owner I spoke to didn't know it was a gun control initiative. This was especially true of the over 50 crowd who don't spend much if any time on the internet.Here is another form a commenter on Freerepublic.com:
The NRA dropped the ball on this. They should have started back in early summer. Not focused solely on the Puget sound, and dropped at least $1 million on TV spots the last three weeks running up to the election.
I live in Washington state. There was no effective advertising against 594. I saw no ad stating the facts about the law, or the restrictions or the way it can turn a normal citizen into a lawbreaker or even a felon. There were MANY ads showing peoples faces that were killed by a person that had domestic abuse history and should not have had a weapon. Of course they never said that an accusation of domestic abuse does not have to be proven in court. Nor did they say whether the gun was purchased or loaned. It is a typical liberal law. It makes people feel good, but does not correct the problem (like laws make evil unable to to be perpetrated).The amount of confusion created by the dueling initiatives and the lack of any effective messaging to confront the deceptive I-594 ads can be shown from the fact that 10% of the voters who voted for I-591 also voted for I-594.
The crazy liberals shooting up schools wanted to blame guns instead of themselves, just like tobacco smokers persuaded it was Big Tobacco’s fault.
Now when Adam Lanza steals a gun to shoot, he will get mental health and the gun owner jail for weapon transfer or recklessness.
The crazy liberals shooting up schools wanted to blame guns instead of themselves, just like tobacco smokers persuaded it was Big Tobacco’s fault.
Now when Adam Lanza steals a gun to shoot, he will get mental health and the gun owner jail for weapon transfer or recklessness.
I.e we are looking at genocide.
If SCOTUS has any integrity whatsoever, it will strike down this law and all other gun control laws as unconstitutional. Sooner or later, We The People will need to teach gun-grabbers a lesson they won’t be able to forget; waiting for them to burn in hellfire is not enough.
Also, note the Microsoft money poured into this campaign. Coupled with MS support for Communist Core, I think it’s safe to say that we should all avoid giving money to MS and any other criminal enterprises which support pro-criminal legislation.
My BIL, who lives here says that I-594 is a slippery slope, as are all "common sense" gun laws.
I understand the I-594 law requires back ground checks on private sales, ie. selling to a relative, a friend.
This doesn't seem to be very enforceable. How they going to know?
I hope the NRA and other gun rights organizations fight this—and fight it hard.
Otherwise, this will set a pattern for the fascists to continue their march toward forcing Americans into serfdom.
I spoke with a guy yesterday who was heartsick - he had mistakenly voted FOR I-594 and AGAINST I-591. He got them mixed up. I recognized this as a possible outcome from the outset and wonder how many others were similarly confused.
this is our democracy....the golden rule...them that gots the gold, rule....anything they want....
no doubt they'll turn to something else in this state now...we got the pot,we got the gun control, next we'll be voting on assisted suicide....then probably infanticide...
people are stupid...and you can't cure that....
I hope it gets trashed in the courts like it should be....
how can the selling or giving or donating a firearm be any business of the govt...it can't...
you can’t even “give” away a gun to your grandson...forbidden....
Maine is a strong 2nd Amendment state....these gun grabbers will get a fight if they to pull this crap here.
Also, the crime rate here is very low.
Thirdly, we just re-elected our pro-second amendment governor, Paul LePage, to a second term. He is very outspoken and doesn’t take crap from anyone.
Here in Washington state they ran constant TV ads talking about women being killed by husbands and boyfriends.
In reality, only 18 percent of women killed by domestic violence are killed by guns. The majority are strangled or beaten to death.
Women would be better off to own a gun to defend themselves. And what about if somebody is being beaten to death, a friend/neighbor who does not own a gun rushes over, knows where their friend hides a gun and dispatches the would-be murderer?
So here the survivor of the attack would have created a felony by transferring the gun to his/her saviour neighbor.
Replace the neighbor with a child or grandchild attacking the would-be murderer. Another felony.
Victim’s choice: either go ahead and get killed or go to prison.
This is an important topic — thanks for posting this.
Like many here, I’m concerned about the way this law will make felons out of good people (while not bothering the bad guys).
Luckily, I believe this kind of ballot initiative can’t happen in a majority of states. That leaves a minority to worry about.
Not true. In fact there are many loopholes for "temporary transfers".
Hypothetical situation:
You and your BIL are at the range. You each have your own firearms, but want to try one or more of the other’s.
Unless you have had a background check for each time you hand your pistol to him or vice-versa, you are BOTH breaking the law.
591 was the same law in limbo, waiting for a federal background check law.
What a load of crap! Seriously?
How are they proposing to enforce this? Any ideas?
Selectively, which is how fascism works. They're not going to be raiding any shooting ranges to see that nobody touches a gun who isn't the sole owner. What they will do is use it against people they want to harass for something else.
It was very confusiing, and the for and against arguments and individuals were not clear. The education initiative had for by La Raza, against by various people including an army Colonel. Very clear.
I am an out of state military voter, I had to call my dad to figure out which way to vote on each of the gun votes. He keeps up with this type of thing, but for those who don’t, it was not clear at all which side your views lined up with.
(Former military, now military spouse. One good thing I will say for Washington State, they always send out their military ballots in time for elections and in compliance with the law. In fact, they send them out so early I have to wait a few weeks until I can ask relatives or look online to make an informed vote for the smaller races or unclear initiatives like this.)
Thanks for the chart. What a nightmare — lawful gun owners in all other states should take a look at this and be afraid.
You can gift a gun to a close relative - but you may be right - not to a grandson. (So - gift to the dad that then gifts to the grandson).
However, if you want to go shooting with your son or grandson, you can’t loan them your gun at the shooting range! Gifts are okay, transfers (not just sales) are illegal.
But - like one poster said - who will enforce it? I suppose the gun range could be held liable somehow, and will be forced to come up with some way of enforcing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.