Assuming it's modeled off of the current legislative bills. the main takeaways as summarized by POGR in the notice they sent out today are:

Most of this I don't have problems with. It needs more due process though, including more appeals, and the 1 year should be reduced to 30 days, or less whichever is least, pending an in depth investigation into the credibility of the threat. If no credible threat or danger is found, then an investigation should be commenced to determine if the petition was filed maliciously.

This is what happens though when we don't move fast enough. The antis write their own bills and they will pass because they look good and we do nothing to offer viable solutions, and sit around at wildlife refuges ranting about tyranny and crazy bullshit, while paying lip service to the idea of focusing on mental health issues and identifying extreme risks.

Well, here is a bill that will possibly be applied to the "well we all knew he was a danger and saw it coming but nobody did anything" sort. And we as a community didn't offer up our own.

If someone is so immediately dangerous that their guns need to be removed from them, they shouldn't be walking around free!

What is wrong with forcing this to go through due process and allowing the accused to immediately respond to the judge just in case the charge is totally bogus?

Watch this documentary trailer about the 50 billion $ divorce industry and if you get time you can watch the whole thing online. One of the key points is that TROs and ROs are already abused for divorce gamesmanship. Also, the burden of proof to prove someone made a knowingly false accusation is high, they can just say they "felt" threatened.

If you want to repeal the 6th and 8th Amendments then make the case for it, don't gut it with Soviet-style laws like this.

We might as well do away with 72 hour mental health holds too then. A short term, highly temporary, appealable process that includes penalties for abuse should be fine.

Who can institute 72 hour holds?

Also, you seemed to skip right over my first point, if someone is so dangerous their guns need to be removed then they should be locked up themselves. The 72 hour hold actually accomplishes that.

This is about as stupid as putting someone on a do-not-fly list and then letting them walk onto a bus or a train.

We can hold for mental health, but we can't hold for "dude has a high probability of being dangerous but hasn't yet" done properly, with due process, we can likely achieve a brief risk reducing intervention to those people, much like a mental health hold allows now.

They are just as likely to use any other object to assault or kill, including their own firsts, baseball bats, knives, etc.

This will accomplish little other than to create a new method for anti-gun spouses and family members to harass gun owning relatives they don't like.

And if anything it will be used by domestic abusers to disarm their victims and help kill more than it would save lives.

If this wins, expect more.

Until there is no money in gun control for politicians and initiatives fail (this would take Seattlights reading Emerson's Self Reliance rather than the communist manifesto), this will be a yearly thing until WA is CA.

These politics are no more than "people hurting others they don't like via the violence of the state". Those that don't like guns, or self reliance, or people with self respect and decency, Emerson readers, etc... can sit back and watch their enemies suffer.

I am not a Noam Chomsky fan at all. But he does speak the truth saying, "A successful democracy turns humanities natural aspirations into hopelessness". When I see garbage legislation like this, and the retarded masses clapping for it, I certainly feel hopeless.

Then we need to take better charge of the narrative. As a culture we've got nothing other than our internal buzzwords, the assumption anyone who isn't in total agreement is an enemy, irrational fear mongering and an inability to really reach out, because gun politics are mired with other politics that most people don't take seriously. (I'm looking at you religious right and militia nutters)

We don't control the narrative, we don't offer solutions, and sometimes we sound insane.

Maybe WAGuns.org should do it, along with Hunting-Washingon.com. We could call the initiative "Fairness and Diversity in Democracy to stop the 1% from taking your give me that's". That would totally be a slam dunk in "The Kings County".

That is an awesome tagline. Just wish we didn't own it.

While I agree we should control the "narrative" this idea that it's our job to "offer solutions" is absurd. Why? 2/3 of all firearm deaths are suicides. Yet the US is #50 in the world for suicide rate under dozens of first world countries that ban or heavily restrict guns, such as France, Belgium, South Korea, Japan, Montenegro, etc. This proves that 2/3 of firearm deaths in the US would likely happen with or without guns. Whittle the number down to the ~10k homicides and gun murder becomes statistically insignificant compared to other murder and violent death.

However, if you really want to reduce those remaining 10k murders, according to the FBI over 80% of them are being committed by repeat felons who keep getting let out of jail by soft-hearted legislatures and courts, ie: Tuba Man Killer who will be out in 2030 in time to kill again for the 3rd time.

This is why any gun law is doomed to dismal failure and will have zero impact. Criminal control will be the only thing that reduces homicides, and suicides likely cannot be reduced much at all, or else what can we do that these other countries haven't tried for mental health?

This is why I'm so hard on the militia nutters, tinfoil kooks, and rabid conservatives who want to bring Jesus, right wing social issues and fear of brown people to the table with gun rights. Fucking idiots are dragging us down with their needless baggage and rhetoric.

.

You see what happens when we don't offer solutions. Somebody else does. It goes along with controlling the narrative.

I would argue "This is why any gun law is doomed to dismal failure and will have zero impact" isn't true at all. The law is 101% successful and 101% impactful. It hurt the integrity of the Constitution and morons clapped for it. The Propaganda Wedge Issue of Gun Control divided the City and Rural Area cultures to the benefit of "Control". The situation is 100% engineered.