Infographic: Washington's competing gun control initiatives

crosscut.com ^ | 10/17/2014 | unknown

[rktman]

When fall ballots land in mailboxes this week, Washington voters will be asked to vote on two opposing gun control initiatives — one calling for expanded background checks, the other keeping the current system of background checks in place. Below, we explore the dueling initiatives, some of Washington's existing rules around gun ownership and what gun laws have meant in other states.

[rktman]

Infographic at article. Hardly any bias here. (Includes the ofter repeated so it must be true >40% sales BS). NOT! Heads up WA. No firearm fondling without a BGC. So, if there is a shooting range that "allows" folks to "try" a variety of different weapons, would each trial require a BGC? More gleanings from the "gun-violence messaging guide"?

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/748675/gun-violencemessaging-guide-pdf-1.pdf

[rktman]

DOH! Active link:

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/748675/gun-violencemessaging-guide-pdf-1.pdf

[america-rules]

I just got my ballot yesterday

[rockrr]

Washington State “Use them or lose them” rights ping.

[G Larry]

Background checks have NO EFFECT on criminals accessing weapons.

[rktman]

LOL! WHAT THE.............. But, but, but...... gabby gabby and mx. mark kelley-giffords say they do. How could you doubt their sincerity? And we all know that 140% of gun sales never get checked. Right? Hey, if they’re gonna lie they might as well go all in. :>}

[ThunderSleeps]

Background checks will reduce gun violence. Because we all know that criminals will require a background check from each other before selling or trading a gun. Just like they require a doctor's prescription before selling or trading drugs. Trust me this will be so wildly effective you'll wonder why we didn't have it all along!

Yes that was satire, for any lib lurkers reading that, that have to have things explained to them.