Gun store Shooting Locations It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:35 pm


Rules Brads Guns Rainier Arms McCallen Killer Innovations Fessleman Firearms
WGO Chat Room Rehv Arms Vantage Reloading
Gear Fortis WCA 2A Ind. Pintos WAC
Calendar


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.



Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
 A fly in the in Gungrab Oinment 
Author Message
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Seattle
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017
Posts: 45
Quote:
Article 2, section 1 part c

(c) No act, law, or bill subject to referendum shall take effect until ninety days after the adjournment of the session at which it was enacted. No act, law, or bill approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon shall be amended or repealed by the legislature within a period of two years following such enactment: Provided, That any such act, law, or bill may be amended within two years after such enactment at any regular or special session of the legislature by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house with full compliance with section 12, Article III, of the Washington Constitution, and no amendatory law adopted in accordance with this provision shall be subject to referendum. But such enactment may be amended or repealed at any general regular or special election by direct vote of the people thereon.



So since all of these are messing with the RCW just after it was amended by 1639, there may be a requirement that all the new laws will have to pass a super majority.

At least two of these new bills amend RCW that was recently amended by initiative 1639, which triggers a supermajority requirement (66% vote) for two years under the WA constitution.

Initiative 1639 amended RCW 9.41.090, 9.41.092, 9.41.094, 9.41.097, 9.41.0975, 9.41.110, 9.41.113, 9.41.124, 9.41.240, 9.41.129, and 9.41.010

Proposed bill 5062 (mag ban) amends RCW 9.41.010 . The substitute bill specifically says "RCW 9.41.010 and 2019 c 3 s 16 (Initiative Measure No. 1639) are each amended to read as follows". Strangely the mention of the initiative is missing from the original bill.

5061 ("ghost" guns) has the same language in the substitute bill. "RCW 9.41.010 and 2019 c 3 s 16 (Initiative Measure No. 1639) are each amended to read as follows". Likewise, the original bill doesn't mention the initiative.

What does this mean going forwards?


Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:19 am
Profile
Online
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Tacoma
Joined: Sat May 4, 2013
Posts: 3121
It means the Democrats don’t give a shit. They will pass it and then stall any legal challenges as long as possible.


Fri Jan 25, 2019 10:30 am
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Tacoma :(
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011
Posts: 1853
They don't care.

"Kuderer, Patty (D) argued that despite constitutional issues we should pass this and just find out in the courts later."

_________________
"A nation grown free in a single day is a child born with the limbs and the vigour of a man, who would take a drawn sword for his rattle, and set the house in a blaze that he might chuckle over the splendour." Sydney Smith (1771-1845)
Spoiler: show
NOW YOU DID IT...
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage


Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:44 pm
Profile
Online
User avatar

Location: Renton
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018
Posts: 506
A.O. wrote:
They don't care.

"Kuderer, Patty (D) argued that despite constitutional issues we should pass this and just find out in the courts later."


You can watch it here https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=937 ... tream=true


Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:59 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Edmonds
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014
Posts: 6154
Real Name: Curtis
TacticalTuna wrote:
A.O. wrote:
They don't care.

"Kuderer, Patty (D) argued that despite constitutional issues we should pass this and just find out in the courts later."


You can watch it here https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=937 ... tream=true

Think about that for a minute. A lawmaker is not concerned with making sure new laws are consistent with existing ones. It doesn't get any more short-sighted than that. She doesn't realize that approach undermines the rule of law itself and, by extension, neuters the efficacy of lawmakers like herself. What an idiot.


Last edited by Guns4Liberty on Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:19 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Camano Island
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017
Posts: 356
Real Name: Lyle
Guns4Liberty wrote:
TacticalTuna wrote:
A.O. wrote:
They don't care.

"Kuderer, Patty (D) argued that despite constitutional issues we should pass this and just find out in the courts later."


You can watch it here https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=937 ... tream=true

Think about that for a minute. A lawmaker is not concerned with making sure new laws are consistent with existing ones. It doesn't get any more short-sighted than that. She doesn't realize that approach undermines the rule of law itself and, by extension, neuters the efficacy of lawmakers like herself. What an idiot.

Yep. :thumbsup2:

_________________
jukk0u wrote:
Apathy is another and perhaps the biggest obstacle for the defense of our rights...


Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:34 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 6 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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



Rent Me Pintos NRA SAF CCKRBA
Aldersons e-arms.com


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.
[ Time : 0.713s | 14 Queries | GZIP : On ]