 |
 |
It is currently Thu Apr 18, 2024 11:16 am |
|
All times are UTC - 8 hours |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forum rules
Nothing contained in this section shall be construed as legal advice. All members and guests are advised to perform due diligence in regards to laws and legal actions.
No 594 prosecutions...
Moderator: Bill Starks
|
Page 2 of 3 |
[ 39 posts ] | Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next |
| Print view | Previous topic | Next topic |
No 594 prosecutions...
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Location: Kent Station Joined: Sun Jun 8, 2014 Posts: 242 
|
ANZAC wrote: CurtisLemansky wrote: So you're telling us all this bullshit was for nothing, right? So... there seem to be quite a few sellers complying. Hopefully that makes it harder for bad guys to get a gun. We all know it won't make it impossible. Also highlighting another area where the initiative wasn't completely thought out, and perhaps explaining why exemplar prosecutions are in short supply for the SAF court case. The trespassing discussion got me thinking about this. I didn't know about Washington's "misdemeanor presence" law until a deputy told me about it. At least you can sleep well knowing full well you did everything to support this disaster. _________________ skey wrote: Actually this is probably a big success for Seattle. They have finally managed to dig a hole they can't get out of.  |
| Sat Jun 27, 2015 9:35 pm |
|
|
|
|
Location: Kent Station Joined: Sun Jun 8, 2014 Posts: 242
|
ANZAC wrote: CurtisLemansky wrote: So really this bullshit was all for nothing because the law will not be enforced... not once... unless someone is committing worse crimes warranting the PD resources and thus doing stuff that was already illegal. I think I ventured that opinion once before. Which is why amending RCW 9.41.080 would have been a better solution. Doesn't make much of difference now does it.  _________________ skey wrote: Actually this is probably a big success for Seattle. They have finally managed to dig a hole they can't get out of. |
| Sat Jun 27, 2015 9:37 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter   Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired.
|
| Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:16 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: White Center Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 Posts: 6489
|
ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. So how is that "preventing crime" or "saving lives"? 594 is quite clearly is doing neither and that "was pretty obvious," as you put it. |
| Sun Jun 28, 2015 1:03 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: N-Sno Joined: Thu Oct 3, 2013 Posts: 4015
|
ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. They are? Where is the data that supports that statement? _________________ "Hmmm. I've been looking for a way to serve the community that incorporates my violence." -- Leela |
| Sun Jun 28, 2015 2:47 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: East of Japan, not by much. Joined: Fri Jun 3, 2011 Posts: 12990
|
594 - Meh.
_________________ Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day. Give a man a fishing pole, and he will drink too much beer, get tangled in fish line, hook himself in the nose casting, fall overboard, and either drown, or, go home hungry and wet. Give a man a case of dynamite, and he will feed the whole town for a year! BE ON NOTICE: PRIVACY NOTICE: Warning - any person and/or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any governmental structure including but not limited to the United States Federal Government also using or monitoring/using this website or any of its associated websites, you do NOT have my permission to utilize any of my profile information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not limited to my photos, and/or the comments made about my photos or any other "picture" art posted on my profile. You are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, disseminating, or taking any other action against me with regard to this profile and the contents herein. The foregoing prohibitions also apply to your employee, agent, student or any personnel under your direction or control. The contents of this profile are PRIVATE and legally privileged and confidential information, and the violation of my personal privacy is punishable by law. UCC 1-103 1-308 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE |
| Sun Jun 28, 2015 2:54 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
mislabeled wrote: ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. They are? Where is the data that supports that statement? Lots of forum posts here looking for FFLs to conduct trades and private transfers. |
| Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:26 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Aubrey Texas Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 Posts: 384
|
ANZAC wrote: mislabeled wrote: ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. They are? Where is the data that supports that statement? Lots of forum posts here looking for FFLs to conduct trades and private transfers. OK, well, math not being my greatest strength help me out here... To get a meaningful statistic out of that swill would it be: "Lots of forum posts" divided by "Unknown number of guns changing hands" or, "Unknown number of guns changing hands" divided by "Lots of forum posts" Either way your post lacks a position defensible by actual facts. But that's not a new position, is it? _________________ "The next best thing to being clever is being able to quote someone who is." SGN Feedback 40+ all positive. |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 5:18 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: N-Sno Joined: Thu Oct 3, 2013 Posts: 4015
|
ANZAC wrote: mislabeled wrote: ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. They are? Where is the data that supports that statement? Lots of forum posts here looking for FFLs to conduct trades and private transfers. I see. Well, if we look over at our old friend Facebook and the seemingly bottomless bucket of asshat felons posting pictures of themselves with firearms, I think we can quite handily refute your non-data with same. _________________ "Hmmm. I've been looking for a way to serve the community that incorporates my violence." -- Leela |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:23 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: East of Japan, not by much. Joined: Fri Jun 3, 2011 Posts: 12990
|
ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. OMG. LOL. Sooo - gun crime will be solved, felons caught, and gun origins traced - exactly the way they were done - before 594. Shocking news, just shocking. _________________ Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day. Give a man a fishing pole, and he will drink too much beer, get tangled in fish line, hook himself in the nose casting, fall overboard, and either drown, or, go home hungry and wet. Give a man a case of dynamite, and he will feed the whole town for a year! BE ON NOTICE: PRIVACY NOTICE: Warning - any person and/or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any governmental structure including but not limited to the United States Federal Government also using or monitoring/using this website or any of its associated websites, you do NOT have my permission to utilize any of my profile information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not limited to my photos, and/or the comments made about my photos or any other "picture" art posted on my profile. You are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, disseminating, or taking any other action against me with regard to this profile and the contents herein. The foregoing prohibitions also apply to your employee, agent, student or any personnel under your direction or control. The contents of this profile are PRIVATE and legally privileged and confidential information, and the violation of my personal privacy is punishable by law. UCC 1-103 1-308 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:29 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: White Center Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 Posts: 6489
|
RENCORP wrote: ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. OMG. LOL. Sooo - gun crime will be solved, felons caught, and gun origins traced - exactly the way they were done - before 594. Shocking news, just shocking. Right...and as usual - there's no reply to direct questions about how 594 is "saving lives" or "reducing crime" as the campaign claimed. And if all we're doing is citing anecdotal evidence, I've seen a lot of reports of guns being stolen in the last 8 months. Hmmmm, I wonder why. |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:42 am |
|
|
|
 Location: Ohio Joined: Fri Nov 9, 2012 Posts: 3924 Real Name: Sean
|
Benja455 wrote: RENCORP wrote: ANZAC wrote: Well people are (mostly) complying. It was pretty obvious the police are not going to try and supervise every single transaction. They simplest thing to do is work backwards from a more serious crime and look at how the gun was acquired. OMG. LOL. Sooo - gun crime will be solved, felons caught, and gun origins traced - exactly the way they were done - before 594. Shocking news, just shocking. Right...and as usual - there's no reply to direct questions about how 594 is "saving lives" or "reducing crime" as the campaign claimed. And if all we're doing it citing anecdotal evidence, I've seen a lot of reports of guns being stolen in the last 8 months. Hmmmm, I wonder why. Ahhhh, so there it is.....Compliance. Pass off a few lines of pure shit, and people have to comply. For what ? Because of your shitshow that your buddies Allen and Hannauer paid for ? And now you say we should amend RCW, after the fact that your lies aren't working. _________________ United States Army, Retired. 2001 - 2023 |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 2:42 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
ccontrol wrote: "Unknown number of guns changing hands" divided by "Lots of forum posts" Either way your post lacks a position defensible by actual facts. But that's not a new position, is it? It is a sample. Do you think people on this forum are complying with the new law (mostly) or mostly not? (edit) it would be interesting to know the number or % of private transactions FFLs are doing across the state. It wouldn't measure non-compliance, but it would still be interesting to know. Last edited by ANZAC on Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total. |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:16 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
RENCORP wrote: Sooo - gun crime will be solved, felons caught, and gun origins traced - exactly the way they were done - before 594. Shocking news, just shocking. No, the difference is the seller can now be prosecuted if they fail to ensure the buyer got a background check, even if they unknowingly sold to a prohibited person. Last edited by ANZAC on Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total. |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:17 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
waglocker wrote: And now you say we should amend RCW, after the fact that your lies aren't working. I suggested it before 594 passed as a simpler solution. |
| Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:18 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
[ 39 posts ] | Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next |
|
All times are UTC - 8 hours |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests |
| You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|