There is a downside is that the backlash from the left will use up "goodwill" and when a package of minor changes (like listed by dogfish) comes along, they'll reject them out of hand and on principle based on the history, that it is another attempt to "weaken" or "overturn" 594, even when it isn't.

What makes most sense is to try the ideas with most likely support first. It lowers the overall risk.

The counter argument is that the committee will filter out the bills with less support anyway.

No offense or anything but listening to Anzac on this subject is like diet advice from an obese guy.

We need a "like" button.

Anzac, you try your approach with your group of friends who are elected officials and I'll try mine. In the past five years my groups has gotten suppressors and SBR's back and had a WDFW commissioner removed. Remind me again of your accomishments.

That made me chuckle.

The reason I am chiming in is because I'm worried 1245 and 1193 will reduce the chances of ANYTHING getting fixed in 594.
If you guys are all or nothing on it, go to town and don't mind me.

I think it might be possible to attempt both.

But chiseling away slowly might actually kind of work.

BUT that said, what happens next season when they roll out their safety minded mag limits and trigger locks?

Actually bills will be introduced that take both approaches, carpet bombing and surgical strikes.

There's no reason not to hit 594 in all ways including complete repeal. If anything, that makes it more likely to get something than nothing. For one thing, it doesn't alienate the people that don't support it in any way possible. Which is most gun owners in reality (Anzac, obviously not included). But yeah, do whatever you guys want. Keep believing that 594 is about safety and not about registration and eventually taking all guns away. You can just keep giving rights away and then it's on to the next thing for them, because the reality is there will never be enough to suffice the anti's, except for a complete ban of course. But keep telling yourself that they don't really mean to do that, and that there's some point that they are satisfied. Yep, uh huh.

Again, we need a like button.

That's not good enough for the gun haters. Just because someone passed a background check yesterday means nothing. They could have flipped out this morning and not be fit to have guns! Of course!

There is nothing that will satisfy the gun haters, and the gun haters have control of the Democratic Party pretty much. If you don't believe me read their Party Platform.

Don't be so quick to throw all democrats under the bus.

Reread my post. Then read party platforms. A few D politicians will buck their party. But not many. But nowhere did I mention democrats.

Democratic Party includes Democrats. Not arguing, just wanted to make sure you were aware of many pro gun votes from essentially all of the democrats in both the house and senate passing the SBR and suppressor legislation. Out of both pieces of legislation the "nays" totaled less than 10 I believe. With SBRs we had maybe 3 Nay votes and one or two abstentions. More than a few bucked their party line, as it was their party who took these things away from us in 1994. In this state at least we have been able to have them overlook portions of their party's platform.

Yes we need to be wary, but we also have a lot of friends in that party as well.

Most people believe that Human Rights are good things, whether religious or secular, Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative. Each "group" seems to keep different causes in their radar.
The folks who have fallen under the spell of Controllism believe that "we" can make the world a better place by imposing rules against each thing that crops up that they don't like.

Very few of these folks are advocating rules against their own behaviors. So, uhm, make pro-2A activities a part of a newbies behavior.

Take a "Liberal" shooting... Cut down on range days with your friends who are already gun-friendly and take someone who has never held a Tool of Freedom in their hands. Teach them the basic safety rules and point out that if the rules are followed 99.99% of the "accidents" out there could not have occurred.

I like going out shooting with my old friends who grew up with guns, and I get a sense of hope whenever I get to meet another firearms enthusiast and 2A supporter, but nothing tops the feeling of taking some folks who are afraid of guns out shooting and having them thoroughly enjoy themselves.

We're not going to win the hearts and minds of anti-2A people by brandishing in the public (although I absolutely do not condemn these allies for their actions) but rather by getting more inexperienced people out shooting and into the shooting sports.
I despise the MFing scoundrels who would put an anti-Freedom, anti-RIGHT into a party platform, but the only reason they are getting away with it is because the vast bulk of mainstream America has grown distant from firearms in general and they've been "taught" that guns are dangerous and dangerous equals bad, instead of "People are dangerous."

Bring Mainstream America back to shooting. This is not a political party fight (or it shouldn't be) but rather a fight for all of our Rights.

PS : I completely made up the 99.99% figure.

That's my exact point. There will be broad support for bills that rectify but not undo the intent of 594, and it is important to keep those level headed people on side. Hopefully the carpet bombing doesn't undo the chances of the surgical strikes.

this.

conversion > confrontation