WA PingInitiatives and ballot measures sponsored by liberals are never ...NEVER what they appear to be or what they are sold as being.
Most people know this going in.
Posted on 11/08/2014 9:10:07 AM PST by rktman
Initiative 594 just passed in Washington State, bringing on residents mandatory gun background checks and making it a felony to privately purchase or even hand a gun to a friend without government permission.
A story in the Seattle Times the morning after the mid-term elections, revealed the true motives of the I-594 campaign and its proponents. It didn’t take long for the other shoe to drop and the rest of their anti-rights agenda to be exposed. Other states they’re now targeting with initiatives include Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and Maine.
Our rights are and always have been their real target, not criminals. Their goal is not gun “responsibility” or “safety” as they falsely claim. Using wordplay and semantics they’ve attempted to hide these facts.
(Excerpt) Read more at universalfreepress.com ...
We should repeal the 19th Amendment.
That’d solve 1/2 the problems in this country...
Since 1962 this has always been their goal, the total abolition of privately owned firearms.
“Sensible” gun law demands over the years...
And to think, in 1962 Thomas J Dodd and Emaual Cellar proposed the first federal law on common firearms.
1962; “We don’t want to take away your guns, we ONLY want to register handguns! Rifles and shotguns will not be affected”.
1964: “We only want to register all your guns, not ban them! Only Army surplus guns will be banned.”
1968: “We only want to register your guns, and ban “Saturday Night Specials” and small foreign handguns along with army surplus rifles!” (They got the ban on 5 shot army surplus rifles and handguns and small foreign pistols)
1970: “We only want to ban Saturday night specials! Large handguns and rifles will not be affected!”
1976: “We only want to ban all handguns! Long guns will not be affected!”
1981: “The NRA is a rifle organization! They should give up their handguns, and they can keep their rifles!”- Lee Grant on GMA
1984: “We must ban “assault Rifles, unsuitable or hunting!”
1989: George Bush bans import of some foreign made “assault rifles”.
1992: Assault rifle ban passed by Clinton.
2000: first calls to ban single shot .50 cal rifles...
More.......
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest.
Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.
My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
The Brady Center (former HCI) now has the hots to ban anything they can, including common rifles and shotguns.
have to say that the NRA spent relatively little...
The ads they used were stunningly shameless in the lies they told. One held the promise of closing a non-existent “gunshow loophole”. Another featured a family member who lost someone due to a gun-related domestic violence crime. Of course they conveniently left out the fact that the law doesn’t address the legal ownership of the weapon by the perpetrator.
The answer is yes - they left the indelible impression with the LIV’s that this was THE panacea for gun violence.
Texas stands resolved!
WA PingInitiatives and ballot measures sponsored by liberals are never ...NEVER what they appear to be or what they are sold as being.
Most people know this going in.
No mine isn't (West Virginia) we don't even have a voter sponsored initiative process (not that it would pass anyway)....
The Ruling Class believe that science and evolution trump the Revelation of God and the Bible, most importantly, the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo. They are not created but rather the evolved products of evolution, hence they are science’s authoritative enlightened priests and god-men who pray to themselves,
"... as saviors of the planet and as shapers of mankind in their own image.." (The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It, p. xix)
By elevating science and evolution above the Triune God and the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo, they've stupidly mutilated their own personhood as well as the unique definition of man on which our Constitution is grounded. For fifteen hundred years, Christendom and then later Protestant America had followed St. Augustine (AD 354-430) in affirming that all men are three part (mind, body, soul) image-bearers of the transcendent Triune God (Gen. 1:27). This historically unique view of man is the foundation of our Constitutional rights The Genesis account of creation ex nihilo reveals that man is a person because created in the spiritual image of the One God in three Persons. Man was created directly by God with a superhuman intelligence and original nature from which Adam, hence all of us, fell away and to which we are called back. This historically unique view of man is the foundation of our Constitutional rights, including the right to own firearms.
How did the utterly stupid dehumanizing Ruling Class attitude replace the Founding generation’s belief that “all men are created equal” because the spiritual image bearers of the living, personal Holy Triune God?
Codevilla writes that by the 1820s,
“… J. C. Calhoun was reading in the best London journals that different breeds of animals and plants produce inferior or superior results, slave owners were citing the Negroes’ deficiencies to argue that they should remain slaves indefinitely. Lots of others were reading Ludwig Feuerbach’s rendition of Hegelian philosophy, according to which biblical injunctions reflect the fantasies of alienated human beings or, in the young Karl Marx’s formulation, that ethical thought is “superstructural” to material reality. By 1853, when Sen. John Pettit of Ohio called “all men are created equal” “a self-evident lie,” much of America’s educated class had already absorbed the “scientific” notion (which Darwin only popularized) that man is the product of chance mutation and natural selection of the fittest. Accordingly, by nature, superior men subdue inferior ones as they subdue lower beings or try to improve them as they please….As the 19th century ended, the educated class’s religious fervor turned to social reform: they were sure that because man is a mere part of evolutionary nature, man could be improved, and that they, the most highly evolved of all, were the improvers.” (ibid)
As their numbers grew and their narcissism inflated,
“… so did their distaste for common Americans. Believing itself “scientific,” this Progressive class sought to explain its differences from its neighbors in “scientific” terms. The most elaborate of these attempts was Theodor Adorno’s widely acclaimed The Authoritarian Personality (1948). It invented a set of criteria by which to define personality traits, ranked these traits and their intensity in any given person on what it called the “F scale” (F for fascist), interviewed hundreds of Americans, and concluded that most who were not liberal Democrats were latent fascists. This way of thinking about non-Progressives filtered down to college curricula. In 1963-64 for example, I was assigned Herbert McCloskey’s Conservatism and Personality (1958) at Rutgers’s Eagleton Institute of Politics as a paradigm of methodological correctness. The author had defined conservatism in terms of answers to certain questions, had defined a number of personality disorders in terms of other questions, and run a survey that proved “scientifically” that conservatives were maladjusted ne’er-do-well ignoramuses. “(ibid)
While self-mutilated evolutionists view conservatives as "maladjusted ne’er-do-well ignoramuses," Christians who affirm and defend creation ex nihilo, hence the personhood of man are ignorant, anti-science fundamentalists. According to one prominent "self-mutilated" evolutionary theist, not only are they a cause of embarrassment to fashionably-correct, scientifically enlightened Christians, but also guilty of harming Christianity.
Lucky you. There is one in NV and, if I understand it correctly, once the required sigs are obtained, and the legislature comes back in session, they can enact or not. If not then it goes on the ballot for the voters to decide. Don’t know if there’s any recourse in place currently but I’m suggesting some things to several legislators to see if anything can be done. The MAIGgots and moms have until this coming Tuesday (ironically Veterans Day) to submit the signatures required. (which is 101+ thousand or 10% of the number of voters in the last general (s)election here)
PA Constitution
Section 21
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
Probably the same in WA but I guess the commies found a way to stretch the definition of “infringe”. It’s not like they’re saying you CAN’T have guns. Yet!
That wont keep King Co LE from killing a few people over it. GIven what I know about them this is the ‘big break’ they’ve been hoping for.
When I lived in WA the handwriting was already on the wall. The ‘new’ was pushing the ‘old’ aside. At least thats how it was in W WA, a liberal cesspool. I never lived in the eastern part but I think theyre only a couple years behind in tyranny and perversion.
It DID fit my hand. —
Yeah, in Calif, the drought is causing lots of problems here.
Harder and harder to go boating, which risks a boating accident and loss of any cargo.
Pray for rain.
Voters are pretty much like he Democrats in congress, in that they vote for iniatives and people without reading the bill first .
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).
“Voters are pretty much like he Democrats in congress, in that they vote for iniatives and people without reading the bill first .”
From what I understand, I-594 consists of 18 pages of fairly dense legalese.
Few voters are motivated to read 18 pages, let alone with a careful enough attention to details to come up with the chart noted earlier.
This passed because the low information voters were not informed by anyone else of what the initiative really did. The old media was totally “in” to pass this. The did not run any countervailing information, except, perhaps, some comments, or so I have read.
The NRA spent about 6% of what the “progressives” spent on this. There did not seem to be a real campaign to oppose this. Instead, there was a campaign to pass the alternate measure, I-591. To show the level of information and confusion in the voters, at least 10% of the people who voted for I-594 also voted for I-591. I suspect that this could have been defeated if it had received real opposition.
Now we face an emboldened foe who will spend millions to duplicate this effort, when real resistance in Washington, and the defeat of I-594 would have completely disheartened them.
Thanks for your information. It is what I surmised. What happened to the 1.2 million that SAF was supposed to spend to oppose this.
My understanding is that it was all spent on promoting I-591.
And just like every where they`ve tried this registration crap, they`ll be met with resistance and absolute refusal to comply. Let them get radical and it`s CWII. We are at that stage of the resistance, the Rats are for tyranny and the Crats are for tyranny, what choice do we have?
Maybe, I knew to vote against it because zi heard from gun rights advocates that both gun initiatives were an infringement on the second amendment.
My husband and I have a rule that unless we understand what we are voting for, we vote NO, especially if it involves a tax increase.
There is a problem with Republicans in WA, they have been infiltrated by people who are not conservative and have different values. Preserving the constitution isn’t one of them. We have the former head of the local teachers union trying to get into the central committee of the Whatcom Co GOP and a man whose father-in-law founded SSA, the Steam Ship Workers of America, the ILWU union. It’s a mess.
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.
