I am thinking, with a year going by and no stats to show that I-594 did anything to violence, what about running an initiative to repeal it? At the very minimum, it would force public discussion about effectiveness of gun laws, and it also will take the fight to WAGR, instead of letting them build on "success".

Who coordinated the previous"no new firearms law" initiative?

I'm in. Devils advocate though. Just as we can say it hasn't done any good, they can show using that same logic that it hasn't done any bad.

Besides the balatant constitutional issue, all 594 is, is a nuance. And to the antis, or the people who just don't care, our annoyance isn't enough to sway.

It'd a good idea especially if you can get it on the 2016 ballot. More voters turn out and guns being a large issue right now more pro then not. Money is the issue to get advertising with truth. But then Blumberg come in and dumps millions in to misinformation advertising

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I like the idea, but wouldn't it be better to put the money into legal action that could put the smack down on the law?

The big question is what is the lead time between a criminal acquiring a gun and committing a crime. There were plenty of criminals armed BEFORE 594. It is not going to have an immediate blanket effect, more of a cumulative effect.

By the time the initiative is on the ballot, you will have 2 years of data. More importantly, you will force the electorate into data-driven discussion. And that WAGR is guaranteed to lose.

Not necessarily true. They just go straight to the emotional non factual argument which how we lost in the first place.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Thanks, Soly, for an interesting idea.

Personally, I don't think I-594 by itself is the "enemy." Thus, a repeal campaign would not be the best use of resources. How about considering a wholesale rethink of gun laws? (I know, I can hear the detractors now.) The foolishness of "gun free zones," prohibition of private sales of firearms by law-abiding citizens, total lack of mental health considerations regarding firearms ownership, license requirements for concealed pistols. My personal pet peeves might not be yours.

I agree I-594 is a spaghetti tangle of nonsense, and I would rather not have it. But I think a referendum campaign (or even better a Legislature-led rewrite of multiple gun laws) would be even better.

Here is a thought: What simple new legislation would Dave Workman recommend, something that would pass muster with a majority of voters in this state?

Well, the problem is we don't have all the data we need.

The 594 supporter theory goes this way: requiring a seller to get a background check will limit the avenues a prohibited person has to get a gun.
They'll either steal a gun (we should look at firearm theft trends) or buy from the remaining presumably fewer number of people who will sell without a background check, i.e. the black market. The limited supply will drive the price up.

If we could track the DENY rate from private sales it might be directional but it really isn't the story we're looking for.

What we really need to know is how many prohibited people go "aww shucks" and abandon trying to buy a gun either because the black market price is too high or because Joe Public asks to head to an FFL to complete the transaction.

> What we really need to know is how many prohibited people go "aww shucks" and abandon trying to buy a gun either because the black market price is too high or because Joe Public asks to head to an FFL to complete the transaction.

I think that's why I-594 failed to make any impact. The only people who go "aww shucks" are the people who are generally law abiding, but have a DUI on their record which they didn't know would affect their ability to buy guns. Anger management class, depression treatment, etc will also have a similar effect.

The people who are real criminals - they don't come to my store in the first place. It's much easier to get them from the existing criminal market.

Well that's the point, very hard to track how many of them bought from the private market. I agree they didn't go to your store.
Only an idiot would go to an FFL to buy a gun knowing he was a felon. (I realize this does not rule out all felons)