Author |
Message |
milowebailey
Site Supporter
Location: Camano Island Joined: Wed Jan 9, 2013 Posts: 722
|
leadcounsel wrote: The AG is a lawyer. Lawyers are supposed to follow state and federal law. They are not supposed to conspire or advocate to undermine it. The WA constitution and the US Constitution plainly state that gun rights shall not be impaired or infringed. The AG is also supposed to uphold the law, not undermine it. Imagine if the AG were advocating to prevent blacks from eating at public restaurants, or Chinese people from voting, or gays from marrying... this is a continuing outrage against gun owners. If you REALLY want to get off your *** and do something, consider filing a complaint against this lawyer. If you wish to file a complaint against the AG and his law license for advocating the violation of state and federal civil rights, here is the simple and free procedure. It will take you 15 minutes. https://www.wsba.org/for-the-public/con ... t-a-lawyerWill this actually initiate anything, or will it be a waste of 15 minutes. Wouldn't they just toss it in the round file? Not trying to be passive, but why not a class action suit against him.... seems a class action would have more teeth.
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:16 am |
|
|
foothills
Site Supporter
Location: Hoodsport/Shelton Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 Posts: 3372
Real Name: Don
|
Out of curiousness I made a few calls to LEO buddies this morning...
Asking what the general concensus is amongst the rank and file guys regarding enforcement of this stuff.
Every one said there is virtually NO support or plans to enforce or even implement this type of ban unless it is as a result of some other criminal action relating to firearms possession in the use of a crime. They all agree that there is always "That one guy" who will power trip and push the issue, but he is a rarity amongst the cadre.
The common theme was ..."fuck those liberal bastards and their BS laws" "who do they think is gonna enforce this shit..."
594 was brought up repeatedly...as a non enforced law.
I know it doesn't mean much in the legal aspect of things...but it's good to hear that there is solidarity with the responsible gun owner in general...never mind the "law abiding gun owner"
_________________ "The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living".
-- Travis A Kisner
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:19 am |
|
|
PMB
In Memoriam
Joined: Wed Mar 6, 2013 Posts: 12018
|
foothills wrote: Out of curiousness I made a few calls to LEO buddies this morning...
Asking what the general concensus is amongst the rank and file guys regarding enforcement of this stuff.
Every one said there is virtually NO support or plans to enforce or even implement this type of ban unless it is as a result of some other criminal action relating to firearms possession in the use of a crime. They all agree that there is always "That one guy" who will power trip and push the issue, but he is a rarity amongst the cadre.
The common theme was ..."fuck those liberal bastards and their BS laws" "who do they think is gonna enforce this shit..."
594 was brought up repeatedly...as a non enforced law.
I know it doesn't mean much in the legal aspect of things...but it's good to hear that there is solidarity with the responsible gun owner in general...never mind the "law abiding gun owner" And we won't ever hear about the good lawful LEOs doing what is right... But you can bet that we'll hear about every powertripper and every victim of powertripping. I'm glad to hear that about the majority.
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:27 am |
|
|
reginald_burrito
Site Supporter
Location: Not Seattle Joined: Wed Nov 2, 2016 Posts: 698
|
Yes, they’re not enforced now. Not yet. But there will be plenty of opportunities to enforce them in the indefinite number of years ahead, because there’s no way they will get repealed.
_________________ Cognitive dissonance kills
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:27 am |
|
|
PMB
In Memoriam
Joined: Wed Mar 6, 2013 Posts: 12018
|
reginald_burrito wrote: Yes, they’re not enforced now. Not yet. But there will be plenty of opportunities to enforce them in the indefinite number of years ahead, because there’s no way they will get repealed. Only 1 way... SCOTUS.
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:30 am |
|
|
quantsuff
Site Supporter
Location: central wa Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 Posts: 3554
|
I don't clearly understand the grandfathering here,i can keep my mags, and hoot them at the range, as long as i transport them both empty and locked up? meaning no concealed carry of mags 10+?,unless I'm in my residence? confuse
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:28 pm |
|
|
Tobias K
Site Supporter
Location: Seattle Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 Posts: 50
|
Don't trust "grandfathering" farther than you can spit. California learned that the hard way.
|
Fri Dec 28, 2018 11:07 pm |
|
|
foothills
Site Supporter
Location: Hoodsport/Shelton Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 Posts: 3372
Real Name: Don
|
Tobias K wrote: Don't trust "grandfathering" farther than you can spit. California learned that the hard way. Exactly... "grandfathering" to me is how my Grandpa would have done things, as in keep your cards close, don't run your mouth about what you have and keep a low profile. He made it thru all of prohibition and many other years with a still set up on the place and a small but discreet clientele.
_________________ "The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living".
-- Travis A Kisner
|
Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:58 am |
|
|
silvermane_1
Site Supporter
Location: South Park,WA Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 Posts: 483
Real Name: Ian
|
foothills wrote: Out of curiousness I made a few calls to LEO buddies this morning...
Asking what the general concensus is amongst the rank and file guys regarding enforcement of this stuff.
Every one said there is virtually NO support or plans to enforce or even implement this type of ban unless it is as a result of some other criminal action relating to firearms possession in the use of a crime. They all agree that there is always "That one guy" who will power trip and push the issue, but he is a rarity amongst the cadre.
The common theme was ..."fuck those liberal bastards and their BS laws" "who do they think is gonna enforce this shit..."
594 was brought up repeatedly...as a non enforced law.
I know it doesn't mean much in the legal aspect of things...but it's good to hear that there is solidarity with the responsible gun owner in general...never mind the "law abiding gun owner" Never trust anyone whose livelihood career prospects, and pensions depend on enforcing unconstitutional laws.
_________________ "The more laws, the less justice." Marcus Tullius Cicero
"When a government becomes powerful it is destructive, extravagant and violent; it is an usurer which takes bread from innocent mouths and deprives honorable men of their substance, for votes with which to perpetuate itself." Marcus Tullius Cicero SAF, GOA Member
|
Thu Jan 17, 2019 3:24 am |
|
|
foothills
Site Supporter
Location: Hoodsport/Shelton Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 Posts: 3372
Real Name: Don
|
silvermane_1 wrote: foothills wrote: Out of curiousness I made a few calls to LEO buddies this morning...
Asking what the general concensus is amongst the rank and file guys regarding enforcement of this stuff.
Every one said there is virtually NO support or plans to enforce or even implement this type of ban unless it is as a result of some other criminal action relating to firearms possession in the use of a crime. They all agree that there is always "That one guy" who will power trip and push the issue, but he is a rarity amongst the cadre.
The common theme was ..."fuck those liberal bastards and their BS laws" "who do they think is gonna enforce this shit..."
594 was brought up repeatedly...as a non enforced law.
I know it doesn't mean much in the legal aspect of things...but it's good to hear that there is solidarity with the responsible gun owner in general...never mind the "law abiding gun owner" Never trust anyone whose livelihood career prospects, and pensions depend on enforcing unconstitutional laws. Didn't say I TRUSTED anyone...but when sitting around a campfire after a few beers and whatevers talking with guys you've known for years if not decades, you kinda get a feel for a persons general outlook on things. I will say I trust what I'm told by my established long term friends more than, some random guy on an internet forum.
_________________ "The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living".
-- Travis A Kisner
|
Thu Jan 17, 2019 7:13 am |
|
|
quantsuff
Site Supporter
Location: central wa Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 Posts: 3554
|
TacticalTuna wrote: So this shit kicker of a AG got a commissioned study back that said magazine bans won't do shit and then he begs the legislature to introduce a magazine ban? WHAT THE FUCK First I've heard of this... this seems like a news story to me, if only someone were to leak the details to the MSM, even better if there was a cover up of the study...
|
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:26 am |
|
|
Tonydec
Location: Tacoma Joined: Wed Jun 4, 2014 Posts: 483
|
quantsuff wrote: TacticalTuna wrote: So this shit kicker of a AG got a commissioned study back that said magazine bans won't do shit and then he begs the legislature to introduce a magazine ban? WHAT THE FUCK First I've heard of this... this seems like a news story to me, if only someone were to leak the details to the MSM, even better if there was a cover up of the study... The cover up will come from the MSM, or at a minimum aiding and abetting in it.
|
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:38 am |
|
|
|