WA bill 1588 - require background checks for all gun sales.

[Motivated]

Workman was the most uninformed person I've ever heard, not only on this legislation but, gun rights in general.

You obviously haven't heard him much then.

This is the first and hopefully last time I will listen to Mr. Workman. For him to plead ignorance of important gun legislation in his home state given the heightened awareness of the issue is unforgivable IMO. What does he actually concern himself with?

Even more pathetic is Carlson's refusal to ask Rep. Hope why he is in direct opposition to the guidance of the NRA on this legislation.

[Motivated]

If there is no hope of defeating this bill as written then push for an amendment that prohibits any record keeping that would resemble "registration".

If this bill passes, registration is a foregone conclusion IMHO.

[Massivedesign]

This is the first and hopefully last time I will listen to Mr. Workman. For him to plead ignorance of important gun legislation in his home state given the heightened awareness of the issue is unforgivable IMO. What does he actually concern himself with?

I would suggest staying out of Workman's Corner on this site then, where he posts his articles on a daily basis. I am sorry that you feel you can also completely judge a person based upon one interview. We will have to agree to disagree on Workman. Having read and listened to him for a few years now I honestly think he does have a clue and a finger on the pulse of what is happening here in WA. People are allowed to have off days too, crazy I know.

[lamrith]

Here is my question, call me uninformed or whatever, I am asking so that I AM informed...

Is there not already gun registration in essence? We will out the 4473 form, the FFL's have to keep records of every transaction.. When police run a gun serial does it not already show 1st legal owner? My point is, there may already be a list of some sort whether we all think there is or not? Obviously this new law would force private party sale records and keep that list "current" but I find it hard to believe that there is not already a gun registration list out there...

Also two people endorsing a bill means automatic passage?

[Massivedesign]

Here is my question, call me uninformed or whatever, I am asking so that I AM informed...

Is there not already gun registration in essence? We will out the 4473 form, the FFL's have to keep records of every transaction.. When police run a gun serial does it not already show 1st legal owner? My point is, there may already be a list of some sort whether we all think there is or not? Obviously this new law would force private party sale records and keep that list "current" but I find it hard to believe that there is not already a gun registration list out there...

Also two people endorsing a bill means automatic passage?

No. The only way to find the 1st owner is a manual search. The ATF will take the serial # and contact the mfg, who will tell them the distributor they sold it to. Then the ATF will contact that distributor and they will tell them the dealer they sold it to. Then the ATF will contact that dealer and have them pull the 4473 and fax it to them. It's a process!

When doing a NICS check, the only thing the .gov knows is that you were approved to purchase a firearm. They don't know how many, or if you even went through with the transaction.

[foothills]

If there is no hope of defeating this bill as written then push for an amendment that prohibits any record keeping that would resemble "registration".

If this bill passes, registration is a foregone conclusion IMHO.

IMHO...In Your Humble Opinion huh?...Hmmmm...seems to me that your opinion is anything but humble. especially from a new guy that that has not followed Dave Workman's column.

I always hesitate to call someone out...but you smell like a troll.

[Massivedesign]

Easy guys. We are all opinionated and passionate. I do hope Motivated will be able to see past a single interview though before passing judgement on a person who has done a HELL of a lot towards our rights.

[Motivated]

This is the first and hopefully last time I will listen to Mr. Workman. For him to plead ignorance of important gun legislation in his home state given the heightened awareness of the issue is unforgivable IMO. What does he actually concern himself with?

I would suggest staying out of Workman's Corner on this site then, where he posts his articles on a daily basis. I am sorry that you feel you can also completely judge a person based upon one interview. We will have to agree to disagree on Workman. Having read and listened to him for a few years now I honestly think he does have a clue and a finger on the pulse of what is happening here in WA. People are allowed to have off days too, crazy I know.

I'm surprised then that he was so ill informed on this bill. Anyway, Mike Hope will get a negative
from the NRA.

Have a great day!

[lamrith]

Thanks Dan.

Here is my question, call me uninformed or whatever, I am asking so that I AM informed...

Is there not already gun registration in essence? We will out the 4473 form, the FFL's have to keep records of every transaction.. When police run a gun serial does it not already show 1st legal owner? My point is, there may already be a list of some sort whether we all think there is or not? Obviously this new law would force private party sale records and keep that list "current" but I find it hard to believe that there is not already a gun registration list out there...

Also two people endorsing a bill means automatic passage?

No. The only way to find the 1st owner is a manual search. The ATF will take the serial # and contact the mfg, who will tell them the distributor they sold it to. Then the ATF will contact that distributor and they will tell them the dealer they sold it to. Then the ATF will contact that dealer and have them pull the 4473 and fax it to them. It's a process!

When doing a NICS check, the only thing the .gov knows is that you were approved to purchase a firearm. They don't know how many, or if you even went through with the transaction.

[Motivated]

One thing I did not mention- Mr. Workman did ask Rep Hope a very good ? if the new legislation would cost $$. Hope's response was a resounding yes. Read: "fees" to go up up up to support the latest bureaucracy.

[Twackalacka]

Wow, another turn-coat rebloodlican......fuck the republicans.......we need a freedom party!!!!!!

[DocNugent]

Easy guys. We are all opinionated and passionate. I do hope Motivated will be able to see past a single interview though before passing judgement on a person who has done a HELL of a lot towards our rights.

I, for one, look forward to Motivated's forthcoming book on gun rights and responsibilities in Washington state . . . .

[Motivated]

Easy guys. We are all opinionated and passionate. I do hope Motivated will be able to see past a single interview though before passing judgement on a person who has done a HELL of a lot towards our rights.

I, for one, look forward to Motivated's forthcoming book on gun rights and responsibilities in Washington state . . . .

Watch for it on the New York Times best seller list. It's not to miss.

[rapgood]

Workman was the most uninformed person I've ever heard, not only on this legislation but, gun rights in general.

Rubbish.

[ANZAC]

I just sent an email to the judiciary committee. Word is this bill is getting bipartisan support, yet it is critically flawed.

Here are some of the points I made.

HB 1588, as it is written:
- fails to make it easy for gun buyers and sellers to get a background check by accessing a larger network (almost 300) federally licensed Federal Firearm Licensees (FFL 01's, in BATF language)
- removes the free market pricing of a background checks, by forcing "dealers" to charge a fixed price of $20 for private sales, some dealers may decline to process at this fixed price
- removes the consumer choice of who performs that check (right now you could go to a FFL and request a transfer and background check for a private sale - this bill makes it mandatory to go to the police or a "dealer", someone who sells guns)
- fails to implement the required Brady waiting period on handgun sales
- misses an opportunity to collect WA sales tax, where this would apply under state law
- in the definition of an "unlicensed person" fails to consider holders of FFL 03's (curio and relics) who may purchase certain firearms without a background check legally under federal law. I am licensed by the BATF, but I am not a dealer under the RCWs. I should not be considered an "unlicensed person" for guns I can legally purchase under federal law.
- fails to cover gifts/transfers to family members (why should we assume that family members may not be felons or mentally incompetent?)

Whether you agree with me or not on Brady wait, family gifts, and sales tax, they are levers I am using to push them towards the existing process.
It also seems to restrict transfers to "dealers" (under RCW, those who sell guns as a business) and police, rather than being all FFLs including Kitchen Table.

It looks to me like this bill would require FFL 03's (C&R) would have to get background checks for in-state purchases! Crazy!