GOAL Post 2020-8 is up

GOAL Post 2020-8, Legislative Update from Olympia 28 February 2020 - Gun Owners Action League of Washington

I haven't been posting these, since they are now regularly posted to that web site, and let's face it, I haven't been posting much at all.

Legislative season is almost over, although with the clown show Olympia has become it is no longer accurate to suggest that our money or freedom are safe if the legislature is not in session. We're talking about a state where the state tried to sue the voters for an initiative we passed, after all.

Berthold Brecht would have been right at home here.

Anyway. It sounds like most of the bills are dead, although, as Joe points out, these clowns are always willing to pull a Miracle Max on bills that should have died...

Plus there's always the possibility that Steyer and Bloomberg will finance another corrupt initiative to back an even worse law.

One good bill remains, that would remove the restriction on spring-assisted knives. I have a lot of respect for the late Glenn Ford, Capt. USNR (RET), but The Blackboard Jungle resulted in silly restrictions on knives you can open with one hand, which sounds like a minor inconvenience until you need both hands to do a job, and a third to access the tool you need to do it. ("No shit, there I was, 30 feet up a ladder...")

The majority of the rest of the remaining gun-related bills should die in a fire.

Good News/Bad News

NRA-ILA | Washington: Gun Ban Bills Fail Crossover Deadline

Today, March 13th at 5:00PM, was the cutoff deadline for all bills to be voted out of the chamber in which they originated. Having failed to receive a floor vote, the following bills are likely dead for this year.

The Substitute to Senate Bill 5062, sponsored by Senator Patty Kuderer (D-48), and House Bill 1068, sponsored by Representative Javier Valdez (D-46), were filed at the request of Attorney General Bob Ferguson. SB 5062 would have banned the possession of ammunition magazines with a capacity greater than 10 and HB 1068 would have banned those greater than 15. They would have encompassed the standard capacity magazines for many handguns and rifles commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for self-defense. SB 5062 would have required that those who owned non-compliant magazines prior to the ban would only be allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances such as at licensed shooting ranges and nationally sanctioned sport shooting events. These magazines would have had to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense.

Senate Bill 5174, sponsored by Senator Guy Palumbo (D-1), would have increased the time, cost, and government red tape that law-abiding adults must go through in order to obtain a Concealed Pistol License by requiring a mandatory training course that meets arbitrary standards. Adding additional barriers to law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise a constitutional right would not improve public safety. Concealed carry permit holders have consistently demonstrated themselves to be one of the most law-abiding segments of the population in Washington and across the country. Hindering them from being able to defend themselves and their families would not affect criminals who do not obey the law.

Senate Bill 5745, sponsored by Senator Marko Liias (D-21), would have expanded Washington’s existing Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO) to allow Second Amendment rights to be suspended for individuals alleged to make certain threats by third party accusers with little, if any, real evidence and limited “due process” for the respondent. Hearings for the orders would have been ex parte, where the respondent would not have been present to challenge the accuser and defend against allegations made against them. The issuance of an order would have immediately prohibited the respondent from exercising their Second Amendment rights. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms should not be treated as a second-class right and should only be restricted consistent with the constitutional requirements of due process.

House Bill 1010, sponsored by Representative Tana Senn (D-41), would have allowed the Washington State Patrol to destroy forfeited firearms rather than raise funds by selling them to licensed firearm dealers.

However, several anti-gun bills did receive a floor vote and passed their chamber of origin, and are still alive for the session.

House Bill 1225, sponsored by Representative Laurie Jinkins (D-27), would require law-enforcement to seize firearms and ammunition when they are called to the scene of an alleged domestic violence incident and hold them for at least five business days. This would result in property being confiscated without first going through due process and subjecting citizens to bureaucratic red tape to get their property returned.

House Bill 1465, sponsored by Representative Roger Goodman (D-45), would require CPL holders to undergo a state background check on handgun purchases instead of the instant NICS check that is currently being conducted as a courtesy by the FBI. Unfortunately, beginning July 1st, the FBI will no longer be conducting these courtesy NICS checks for CPL holders.

House Bill 1786, sponsored by Representative Laurie Jinkins (D-27), would expand firearm seizures to a wider range of protective orders with little to no due process, and in some cases, would remove a judge’s discretion as to whether to impose firearm restrictions upon respondents of protective orders.

Senate Bill 5027, sponsored by Senator David Frockt (D-46), would expand Washington’s existing Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO). It would affirm that the ERPO can be issued against minors while also infringing upon the self-defense rights of law-abiding parents or others in the household without due process.

Senate Bill 5181, sponsored by Senator Kuderer, would suspend Second Amendment rights without due process for six months from individuals who are admitted for a 72-hour mental health evaluation, but who are not subsequently involuntarily committed.

The Substitute to Senate Bill 5434, sponsored by Senator Claire Wilson (D-30), would increase the areas where law-abiding citizens are prohibited from possessing firearms, including holders of a Concealed Pistol License (CPL) carrying a handgun for self-defense. It would mandate that child care facilities be “gun-free zones” where law-abiding citizens would be unable to defend themselves and their loved ones against criminals who simply ignore such arbitrary boundaries. In addition, they would be required to post signs indicating their “gun-free zone” status.

In addition, pro-gun legislation, House Bill 1934, also passed its chamber of origin and will be advancing. Sponsored by Representative Michelle Caldier (R-26), HB 1934 would allow military members who are stationed or assigned out-of-state to renew their CPL by mail.

Thank you to all the NRA members and Second Amendment supporters that attended committee hearings and contacted legislators. While your NRA is at the Capitol on a daily basis throughout the session, it is your continued involvement that makes the difference. Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org and your email inbox for further updates on these bills and others affecting our Second Amendment rights in Washington.

"Sick of the NRA? Read this."

Breach/Bang/Clear: Sick of the NRA? Read this. | Duane Liptak with a reality check

...people bash the NRA a lot without understanding the reality of how the silly reindeer games get played on the hill. Try to at least understand the value that the organization provides because it is big and very real, and critically important. I want a live tank in my front yard and mail order Solothurn S-18/1000’s from Bannerman’s. But the path to get there isn’t exactly a clear one in the current legislative environment. Without the strength of the NRA helping to pack the courts, shape elections the best we can, fight off bad legislation wherever possible and pave the way to improve rights through the judiciary (we’ve confirmed 85 federal judges in addition to the 2 Supremes with 130 more to go), I fear we won’t have a path to it at all. That’s why I’m a member, and helping to make the organization as right as we can get it is why I got involved.

I get the frustration. I’m mad that we’re even in this situation. How could we, a republic, born from free men taking up arms against oppression, even be considering some of this nonsense? It baffles me. And, I used to be super frustrated with the NRA, also. Until…I was forced into being involved in politics and seeing how this whole mess works. Now I know what I have to do, and I hope everyone out there who cares about gun rights can get on board, too.

So, if you want to support GOA or FPC or FPC, or JPFO…that’s fantastic. Join your state organization, also. Be active locally. Let your elected representatives know how you feel on these issues regularly. But…be a member of the NRA, and be active. Vote. Let the board and the staff know where you stand on issues. Help to be a part of the solution. If we, as gun owners, can’t stick together and take advantage of the strengths of all of our organizations where they can do the most good, we will lose this fight. I’m not willing to lose.

 This is the last three paragraphs. Go read the whole thing.

Columbia County, OR, Sheriff; a Review of sorts

For those Not From Around Here, the state of Oregon is Shall Issue for concealed handgun licenses for residents, and says that counties "may issue licenses to residents of adjacent states", i.e., California, Idaho, Nevada, and Washington.

Most counties seem to take the position that this means "residents of states adjacent to them", which means that many counties that are inclined to be so generous, only do so for folks directly across the state line; this also means most counties say "there are no states adjacent to us, so we won't do it." For years Clatsop county, at the mouth of the Columbia River, was considered to be the best bet for a non-resident permit, to the point that they were inundated beyond their ability to handle the load (they said), and started restricting issue to residents of Washington counties on the Olympic peninsula; that is, counties that are adjacent (or close to) Clatsop County. (This is a shame, as Clatsop County is a convenient destination for a weekend getaway; Seaside is a rather typical tourist stop which happens to be on a beach that Lewis and Clark frolicked on, but Astoria has some legit attractions, like the Columbia River Maritime Museum.)

Several years ago, the Sheriff of Grant County, which is entirely surrounded by other Oregon counties, and which I am told is the poorest county in Oregon, struck upon a radical plan to raise funds for his department: He would take his concealed handgun licensing show on the road, visiting gun shows in adjacent states.

I believe he did one or two shows in California first, then did one in Washington, and by the third or fourth fun show he had raised enough money to purchase a portable digital fingerprinting system.

Other Sheriff's got into the act; I heard a claim (unsubstantiated) that the efforts were coordinated among the Sheriffs.

So last summer I got a calendar reminder that our OR permits would expire in 6 months. Our latest permits were issued by Columbia County, just west of Portland, east of Clatsop County, and across the Columbia River from Brigid's hometown. I reset the reminder to three months out...

While I had "use or lose" leave time, alas, various things prevented us making plans before the permits expired, so we wound up going one week late.

Here's the deal: Columbia County only issues non-resident permits to residents of Washington. You need your WA CPL. If you go during the week you make an appointment, online, for a half hour block. $60.00.
They process permits on some Saturdays, cash only, on a walk-in basis.

So I made our appointments for 2:00 and 2:30, we got a room in Seaside at the time share for a couple of days, drove over -- in the pouring rain -- showed up at 13:50...
...and we were both done including photographs by 14:00.

Now, a new permit requires fingerprinting, so I'm sure those appointments take longer, but I still regard that as pretty good.

Also, part of the reason we got delayed until after our OR permits expired was that Mrs. Drang had to renew her WA CPL first, and on our way there she realized she had left it sitting on the desk.

Lanie (I think I'm spelling her name correctly) said "no problem" and gave us an email address to send a scan of her CPL to, and said they would process it normally.

So, if you're from Washington State and want to get (or renew) an Oregon carry permit, we endorse the Concealed Handgun Licensing services of the Columbia County Sheriff's Office.

The Quixotic Act of The Day 11/16/18

I think WhiteHouse.Gov petitions are about as fine an example of quixoticism as you'll find, but, still, that abortion of a ballot initiative passed, so wotthehell, as Mehitable said to Archie:

To abolish unlawful, unjust, and unconstitutional gun laws in Washington state (I-1639).

The great state of Washington, through fraudulent petitioning and tricky wording, has placed on the ballot and passed I-1639; one of the strictest anti-gun laws in our country. We The People therefor ask that our great President and our public servants, step in and abolish such laws restricting, infringing upon and/or otherwise limiting our right, that has been guaranteed to us within the 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights, and further protected and solidified through centuries of bloodshed and legal proceedings.


We The People humbly and gracefully plead for your helping hand Mr. President. Please put an end to the destruction of our freedoms and liberties by protecting our second amendment rights; here in Washington state and throughout the states of our great country.
Thank you.

I mean, I don't know what they think the President can do about this, beyond launching a Twitter campaign.

Still.

Note that there's no restriction on state of residence for signing this thing...

I did not know that.

SO, reading this article -- MRE Shelf Life and Stockpiling MREs - AllOutdoor.com, I wound up at this page: USDA -- Food Product Dating.

Where I learned that the "pull dates" on food items have nothing to do with food safety or health. (With one exception, see emphasis added below):

Does Federal Law Require Dating?
Except for infant formula, product dating is not required by Federal regulations.

For meat, poultry, and egg products under the jurisdiction of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), dates may be voluntarily applied provided they are labeled in a manner that is truthful and not misleading and in compliance with FSIS regulations. To comply, a calendar date must express both the month and day of the month. In the case of shelf-stable and frozen products, the year must also be displayed. Additionally, immediately adjacent to the date must be a phrase explaining the meaning of that date such as "Best if Used By."

Are Dates for Food Safety or Quality?
Manufacturers provide dating to help consumers and retailers decide when food is of best quality. Except for infant formula, dates are not an indicator of the product’s safety and are not required by Federal law.

What Date-Labeling Phrases are Used? There are no uniform or universally accepted descriptions used on food labels for open dating in the United States. As a result, there are a wide variety of phrases used on labels to describe quality dates.

Examples of commonly used phrases:

• A "Best if Used By/Before" indicates when a product will be of best flavor or quality. It is not a purchase or safety date.
• A "Sell-By" date tells the store how long to display the product for sale for inventory management. It is not a safety date.
• A "Use-By" date is the last date recommended for the use of the product while at peak quality. It is not a safety date except for when used on infant formula as described below.

Although experience says that the bread mix you found in the back of the pantry from 5 years ago may no longer have fully (or any) active leavening...

So the other evening at the emergency communication team meeting we were talking about "Go Bags" and Bug Out Bags. I took my Go Kit -- which is to say, my bag for CERT or ARES/RACES work, not my "Get Out Of Town" bag.

I also took my car kit in, to show a couple of thing in it. Now, my car kit is mostly a cheap packable rain suit, such as you find at a big box store, hat and gloves, reflective vest... It also has a package of Datrex Lifeboat rations. (Might have been another brand.)

And it was pointed out to me that "These are almost expired."

The packaging is intact, these are safe to eat.

"But they're almost expired!"

s*i*g*h

Cue the hysteria! -- Edit

CodeIsFreeSpeech.com

OK, I'm actually a few days late with the "Cue the hysteria!" title, still...

You may be aware that the US Government has lifted the restriction on the sharing online of files with instructions to 3D print firearms components.

This, of course, is merely the latest in a series of events which are going to kill us all.

The thing is...

There are many inherent issues with manufacturing a firearm, or firearm parts, using a 3D printer. For instance, the plastic used isn't exactly up to withstanding the pressures of a modern firearm cartridge being fired, which limits which parts of the firearm they are suitable for. In order for the firing pin to detonate the primer on a cartridge, it has to be made of metal, or possibly, I suppose, some other hard material, which would probably be so exotic as to be impractical.

But.

A fact which escapes those convinced that the availability of these files online mean the end of civilization is that it has always been legal to manufacture a firearm in your garage workshop, as long as you did not attempt to sell it.

Here, for example, is a thread about building a glorious revolutionary AK47 from a people's shovel, purchased for a whole 2 kopeks I mean rubles I mean capitalist pig dollars at an antique barn in Vermont: DIY: Shovel AK - photo tsunami warning! | Northeastshooters.com Forums

So, why (one might ask) was the distribution of files with instructions on how to 3D print firearms components banned? Well, the US State Department takes its responsibility (not to say authority) to control export of firearms and weapons technology seriously.

Now, this authority does extend to some information technology, namely, computer security/anti-virus files. (In an earlier job I had to help some sales reps for a local aviation firm process requests to Uncle Sam to let them take their laptops, with anti-virus software installed, overseas.)

But these are 3D printer files are hardly innovative in and of themselves, and cannot be seriously be considered a threat to national security.

What made the US State Department lift the ban on Internet distribution of 3D printer files is that the US State Department does not have a broad legal authority to ban the distribution of information.

That's right: The ability to download these files is a First Amendment issue, as well as a Second Amendment one. (Some would even argue that it is not a Second Amendment one at all.)

CodeIsFreeSpeech.com

Elsewhere, Roberta X addresses the issue in her post The Adventures of Roberta X: That's Not How This Works.

There is also an excellent Twitter thread that starts with this one:

Ok, on this, the eve of one of my favorite things ever - the #democratization of technology - let's have a serious, sober-ish conversation about this whole #StopDownloadableGuns / #Stop3DPrintedGuns hysteria by starting at the beginning and working forward (1/?)

— Jonathan (@CorrelA_B) August 1, 2018

(There is a Thread Reader version of the full thread here: Thread by @CorrelA_B: "Ok, on this, the eve of one of my favorite things ever - the of technology - let's have a serious, sober-ish conversation a […]" #democratization #StopDownloadableGuns #Stop3DPrintedGuns #guncontrol

EDIT: Meanwhile, a commie judge here in Western Washington has ordered Defense Distributed to shut down their site again: DEFCAD

Fortunately, the files are available elsewhere: CodeIsFreeSpeech.com

WA -- SAF, CCRKBA WARN I-1639 SPONSORS THAT ‘UNREADABLE’ PETITIONS VIOLATE LAW

The Second Amendment Foundation and Citizen's Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms send:

SAF, CCRKBA WARN I-1639 SPONSORS THAT ‘UNREADABLE’ PETITIONS VIOLATE LAW
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today warned sponsors of anti-gun Initiative 1639 via a demand letter that their campaign “is utilizing unreadable petitions in violation” of state law, and demanded that this be corrected to “conform to the legal requirements.”
Olympia attorney Shawn Newman, writing on behalf of the two Bellevue-based organizations, noted, “The petitions for I-1639 have the proposed measure printed on the back of the sheets in such fine print as to be unreadable… Use of fine print is unconscionable.”
State law mandates that initiative petitions “have a readable, full, true, and correct copy of the proposed measure printed on the reverse side of the petition,” Newman’s letter warns.
“In the short time that I-1639 petitions have been in circulation,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “SAF and CCRKBA have been contacted by several people who could not read the initiative language. I’ve always been warned to read the small print before signing anything. I-1639, as it appears on the back of each petition, is all small print. That should tell voters something about its content.”
According to Newman’s letter, “Obviously, due to the microscopic maze of fine print used by the initiative sponsors to disguise the actual language of the initiative on the back of their petitions, voters cannot be fully informed.” He cautioned I-1639 sponsors that having their paid signature gatherers tell voters to “read it online” is “no substitute for following the law.” Newman suggested reprinting the petitions, and contact voters who have already signed to allow them the opportunity to sign a readable copy of the measure.
“We would prefer that you become compliant with the law,” Newman wrote, “but if you choose to continue in this illegal manner, we will be forced to litigate this matter.”
Copies of the letter were sent to Secretary of State’s office, the Washington State Attorney General, and “many other interested parties to ensure that everyone has been notified of the fundamental problem with your petitions.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

 (More after the jump...)

Two White House Petitions

National Reciprocity for the Nation's 17 Million Concealed Handgun Permit Holders! | We the People: Your Voice in Our Government

Right now at 8,901, and

Needs 91,909 signatures by August 17, 2017 to get a response from the White House

Also: Repeal the NFA | We the People: Your Voice in Our Government

267,451 signed. At this point, no idea whether it had enough signatures by the deadline, which was in February, to get any attention.

 

Of course, the SHARE act, if passed, will gut NFA '34 anyway.

 

As has been par for the course since this WhiteHouse.Gov petition thing has started, many or most of the things listed are silly, pointless, puerile, hyper-partisan. 

The Afghan Girls Robotics team was allowed to come to the USA to compete, but the petitions (two, at least) are still there.
Charlie Gard and his parents re coming to America in hopes that an experimental treatment will work. (Either way, see the National Health Death Panel in action! See the Americans give the National Health Death Panel the finger!)
"Make Trump take a MENSA-monitered IQ test"? smh

GOAL Post 2017-6

Late again, due to communications/technical errors. I'm wondering whether this is an innocuous technical problem or hostile action...

I do want to point out that several of the pro-Second amendment Rights bills are sponsored by Democrats.  This is a trend that is more obvious at the state level, at least in WA.

***

FROM: GOAL WA

TO: undisclosed recipients

SENT: Mon 2/13/2017 4:15 AM

SUBJECT: GOAL Post2017-6

 I'm having major ISP problems.  A couple of weeks ago Cox Communications started bouncing my GOAL Post messages -- first time in ten years.  I'm working with them to resolve the issue, but this is going out to selected individuals.

GOAL Post 2017-6

Legislative Update from Olympia10 February 2017

• NEW BILL(S) FILED
• DROPPING HB 1784/SB 52 56 FROM TRACKING
• POSITION CHANGE ON SB 5441
• NEED HELP ON HB 1933/SB 5506
• PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD
• PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED
• POLICY COMMITTEE CUT-OFF DATE NEXT FRIDAY,17 FEB
• ACTION ON BILLS

 SB 5795, by Senator Chase (D-32), would mandate firearm owners have personal liability insurance to purchase or possess any firearm. No minimum coverage amount is specified, but you must show your policy to the FFL to purchase a firearm.

After a deeper evaluation of HB 1384/SB 5256, I am dropping them from the gun bill tracking list. As clarified, a “sexual assault protection order” is separate and distinct from a domestic violence protection order and is NOT to be used in lieu of a DV protection order. It does NOT automatically prohibit firearm possession.

After consulting with law enforcement professionals, I am changing the GOAL position on SB 5441 (involuntary freeze on firearm possession) from “OPPOSE” to “NEUTRAL.” The “consultees” are both rock solid pro-gun individuals with more than 60 years combined law enforcement experience, most of it on the street.

Washington gun owners need a push on HB 1933 and SB 5506.These bills would allow transfer of a firearm without I-594 background check at non-profit events such as Ducks Unlimited or Friends of NRA dinners. HB 1933 has not been scheduled for a hearing in House Judiciary.SB 5506 was considered in a public hearing but no executive session (committee vote) has been scheduled. If no action is taken on these bills by next Friday (17 Feb), they are dead for the session.  Please call or e-mail your Representatives and ask them to push HB 1933 in House Judiciary and your Senator to push SB 5506 in Senate Law & Justice.

Public hearings were conducted last week on HB 1100, HB 1501 and HB 1731.No executive action (committee vote on HB 1100 yet. Executive session (committee vote) on HBs 1501 and 1731 are scheduled for 16 Feb, along with HBs 1122, 1387, 1529 and SB s 5506 and 5552.the last day to get bills out of committee.

(After the hearings, and outside (state agency, other public agency, private citizen) input is heard, the committee staff prepares a “bill report” that describes the effect of the bill as submitted, a summary of public testimony, and includes any amendments to the bill offered by legislators. The bill next has to be scheduled for a vote (passage) in executive session, by the committee chair. Once a vote is taken – IF a vote is taken (not all bills heard get an up or down vote) -- the bill dies in committee or moves on, either to the Rules committee awaiting a floor vote, or to a fiscal committee for their review.)

A public hearing is scheduled for SB 5441 in Senate Law & Justice on Thursday, 15 Feb at 1:30 p.m.

Next Friday is the original chamber policy committee cut-off day, meaning all House Bills that have not passed out of their original policy committee are (nominally) dead for the session, with the exception of bills with a fiscal impact – they have an extra seven days to pass out of one of the fiscal committees (Appropriations or Ways & Means). I threw the word “nominally” in there because a bill CAN be resurrected after missing a cut-off, but it’s extremely rare.

(Just for information, almost 2,200 bills have been filed so far in this session. As stated before, many are filed, few receive action.)

{Bill details after the break}

Help California Fight Back

 Veto Gunmageddon – Protect your 2nd Amendment rights…

If you're a CA voter, sign the petition.

If you''re not a CA voter, well, every buck helps.

New York Values!

Or: Some animals are more equal than others!

NYPD probe ensnares man offering to expedite gun permits - NY Daily News

A Brooklyn volunteer safety patrol member was charged Monday with bribing cops with $6,000 in cash and other goodies to expedite gun permit requests, and three officers were transferred out of the licensing unit as part of the far-reaching NYPD corruption probe.

Shaya (Alex) Lichtenstein, 44, was so cozy with cops in the License Division that he’d spent nearly every day inside the office in police headquarters since 2014, federal court papers say.

Mrs. Drang and I enjoy the TV show Castle, because Malcolm Reynolds is in it, after all, but I have to laugh every time Castle laments the fact that he can't get a gun permit...

The undercover then said he was nervous about getting involved in the scheme.

In response, Lichtenstein pulled out a calculator and estimated the officer could earn $900,000 if he helped with an estimated 150 permits.
...
He claimed all of his customers were eligible applicants and that he was merely asking the officers to speed up the process, the complaint shows.

But a review of his cases showed one applicant who was approved for gun permit in 2013 had a long criminal history, prosecutors said.

I know that a man named Jim March was bringing suit, or suits, in California because in the majority of the state, the way you got a carry permit was by making a large (four or five large, as it were...) donation to the county sheriff's reelection campaign.

Mr March's website does not seem to have been updated in over a decade, so I have no idea what his status is, although at least some counties are better about going shall-issue...)

This could get real festive: Sources: NYPD Corruption Probe Expands To Mayor’s Fundraising « CBS New York

See, the strongest argument against "may issue" (AKA "Local Option", AKA "Discretionary Licensing") is that whomever makes the decision gets to pick and choose, and even if that doesn't result in palms being greased to "expedite a friends request", it is inherently discriminatory. Which was part of Jim March's argument.

The "Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection" acts

Full Title

A bill to provide that any executive action that infringes on the powers and duties of Congress under section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the United States or on the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States has no force or effect, and to prohibit the use of funds for certain purposes.

Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act (H.R. 4321) - GovTrack.us
and
Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act (S. 2434) - GovTrack.us

GovTrack says the two bills are identical.

It also says that HR4321 has a 1% chance of being enacted, and that S2434 has a 20% chance. These percentages are based strictly on "how many bill that made it 'that far' in the process were passed." (I.e, S2434 has been "reported out of committee", and about 1 in 4 bills that reach that stage are passed.)

S2434 is sponsored by Rand Paul and only has one co-sponsor; HR4321 is sponsored by Marlin Stutzman (R, IN-3) and has two co-sponsors. Generally speaking, the more co-sponsors the better the chances.

Write your congressional representatives. I say that knowing that writing my own legiscritters* is an exercise composition, and most likely will only result in my getting a letter from an aide on another issue entirely (assuming the aide hs been trained not to explain to the silly proles why they should let the adults talk), but if you don't play, etc., etc.


*Somewhat unfair, actually, as my Representative, Adam Smith, has gotten decent grades from NRA in the past. Not A+s, to be sure, but not too bad for a D from an urban area.

NO WAY!!!!

Bertha’s restart delayed again; will there be drilling by Christmas? | The Seattle Times

The four-lane, tolled¹ Highway 99 tunnel from Sodo² to South Lake Union is now scheduled to be ready in April 2018, more than two years past the original December 2015 opening the contractors touted in 2010, when they won the $1.35 billion tunnel contract.

More from the "Duh" files:

• Watchdog: Obamacare Exchanges Fail to Detect Counterfeit Documents | Americans for Tax Reform
• Obama vetoes $612 billion defense policy bill in rebuke to GOP | Fox News
• Justice Dept.: No criminal charges for ex-IRS official Lois Lerner 

 

1. First I heard that it's going to be a toll road. Doesn't surprise me, Seattle being run by a bunch of car-hating collectivists who are always eager to squeeze another dime from the taxpayers.
2. "South of Downtown", originally "South of Dome", so-called for the Kingdome, which was demolished before it was paid for. Some ceiling tiles fell off, leading the PTB to assume it was about to fall apart. The demolition crew said it was one of the hardest jobs they ever had.

Hearing Protection Act

ASA ANNOUNCES HEARING PROTECTION ACT: A BILL TO REMOVE SUPPRESSORS FROM THE NFA

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The American Suppressor Association (ASA) is pleased to announce the introduction of the Hearing Protection Act (HPA) by Rep. Matt Salmon (AZ-05). This historic piece of legislation will remove suppressors from the purview of the National Firearms Act (NFA), replacing the antiquated federal transfer process with an instantaneous NICS background check. The HPA also includes a provision to refund the $200 transfer tax to applicants who purchase a suppressor after October 22, 2015.

At this time there is no information posted to GovTrack or OpenCongress, or eve Representative Salmon's official House of Representatives web page about this bill, including a bill number. All the info out there is on blogs and fora, although guns.com does have the text of the bill as introduced. (Goes directly to .pdf file which will open.)

As many have said ( I believe Tamara said it first) suppressors are a safety device and should be sold in blister packs displayed by the cash register.

Frankly, I'd like to see the various gun rights organizations go after gutting the entire National Firearms Act of 1934; most of the limitations under it are arbitrary and serve no demonstrable purpose. As a compromise, since the hoplophobes are so fond of the word, Uncle Sam can keep charging a fee on items like suppressors and short barreled rifles and shotguns, say $50.00, which is to be collected at the point of sale. The idea that these things are so inherently evil that charging a larger tax and making law abiding citizens jump through various regulatory hoops is going to reduce their use in crime is absurd, and reducing the bureaucratic burden would probably result in such an increase in revenue as to be a net gain, not to mention all the bureaucrats who could be reassigned to more productive work.

HR2246 and S1351, Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act

While writing the previous post, I also saw these;

• H.R. 2246: Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act Introduced Jun 01, 2015
• S. 1351: Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act Introduced May 14, 2015

Official Summary

Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act Amends the federal criminal code to:
(1) allow licensed firearms importers, manufacturers, dealers, or collectors (licensees) to sell or deliver any firearm (currently, rifles or shotguns) to a resident of a state other than the state in which the licensee is located or temporarily located if the licensee meets with the purchaser to complete the sale or delivery and the transaction complies with the laws of the state in which the transfer is conducted and the purchaser's state of residence; and
(2) eliminate the requirement that a licensee must conduct business at a gun show only in the state that is specified on the licensee's license. Provides that nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit the sale or other disposition of a firearm or ammunition:
(1) between licensed firearms dealers at any location in any state; or
(2) by a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer to an unlicensed person at a temporary location in any state. Amends definitions for federal firearms provisions to:
(1) revise the definition of a \"member of the Armed Forces on active duty\" to include a member (or member's spouse) who is a resident of the state in which such person maintains legal residence or in which the member maintains a place of abode from which the member commutes each day to the permanent duty station; and
(2) provide that an officer or employee of the United States (other than a member of the Armed Forces) stationed outside the United States for a period exceeding one year, or a spouse residing with such an officer or employee, is a resident of the state in which the person maintains legal residence.

The Official Summary is the same for both; typography is also the same. (I think there should be a couple of line breaks in there, that are missing.)

If I read this correctly, if you can pass a NICS check, then you'd be able to buy a gun in any state you visit.

I don't know how they'd handle the fact that some states have "rosters" of guns that are legal in said states.

If this passes, I predict that the Cabela's in Reno, Vegas, and Tucson* will be doing great business with Californians.

However, since the House bill has only 5 co-sponsors, and the Senate bill has none, I'm not holding my breath. Not this year, anyway.

*And maybe Springfield, OR, although that's a bit far north.

H.R.1217 - National Commission on Mass Violence Act of 2015 (EDIT)

Not sure how I missed hearing about this one.

EDIT: Realized I left off a link to the bill's page. Interestingly, while the text is the same, there seems to have been a name change: H.R.1217: National Commission on Mass Violence Act of 2015 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress is what is listed  now, but Representative King's page lists the title as "H.R.1217 - Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2015."

To protect Second Amendment rights, ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and provide a responsible and consistent background check process.

Introduced by Representative Peter King, R-NY, in March. been in limbo in the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs and House Committee on the Judiciary since then.

Official Summary

Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2015 Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to reauthorize for FY2016-FY2019 the grant program for improvements to the criminal history record system. Amends the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 to:
(1) establish a four-year implementation plan to ensure maximum coordination and automation of reporting of records or making records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System;
(2) direct the Attorney General to make grants to states, Indian tribal governments, and state court systems to improve the automation and transmittal of mental health records and criminal history dispositions;
(3) provide for withholding grant funds from states that have not implemented a relief from disabilities program and the reallocation of such funds to states that are in compliance;
(4) make federal court information available for inclusion in the System; and
(5) allow the submission to the System of mental health records that would otherwise be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Provides that nothing in this Act shall be construed to:
(1) expand the enforcement authority or jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives;
(2) allow the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a federal firearms registry; or
(3) extend background check requirements to transfers of firearms other than those made at gun shows or over the Internet, or to temporary transfers for purposes including lawful hunting or sporting, or to temporary possession of a firearm for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee. National Commission on Mass Violence Act of 2015 Establishes the National Commission on Mass Violence to study the availability and nature of firearms, including the means of acquiring firearms, issues relating to mental health, and the impacts of the availability and nature of firearms on incidents of mass violence or in preventing mass violence. Requires the Commission to conduct a comprehensive factual study of incidents of mass violence, including incidents not involving firearms, to determine the root causes of such mass violence.

I found out about it when I idly clicked the link to "How your U.S. lawmakers voted | The Seattle Times and read that

Background checks on gun sales

By a vote of 244 for and 183 against, the House on Oct. 8 blocked a parliamentary tactic by Democrats aimed at bringing to the floor a bill (HR 1217) now stranded in two committees that would greatly expand background checks on commercial gun sales. The bill would require checks on sales conducted over the Internet, between private parties at gun shows and through classified ads. It would plug existing loopholes that allow an estimated 40 percent of U.S. gun sales to avoid mandatory background checks. Conducted via the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System, these checks are intended to prevent domestic abusers, the mentally ill and individuals with criminal records from obtaining firearms. The bill, which also prohibits the establishment of a national registry of gun owners, is nearly identical to the so-called Toomey-Manchin amendment that failed in a Senate vote in April 2013 four months after the Newtown, Conn., school shootings.

The voting was pretty much along party lines, at least here in the Northwet.

ATTENTION, EURO-WEENIES!

After hitting "Publish" on my previous post, I noticed on the "Dashboard" that Google has the following advisory:

European Union laws require you to give European Union visitors information about cookies used on your blog. In many cases, these laws also require you to obtain consent.

As a courtesy, we have added a notice on your blog to explain Google's use of certain Blogger and Google cookies, including use of Google Analytics and AdSense cookies.

You are responsible for confirming this notice actually works for your blog, and that it displays. If you employ other cookies, for example by adding third party features, this notice may not work for you. Learn more about this notice and your responsibilities.

The only cookies I know anything about are the ones my wife bakes, or, under extreme duress, we purchase at the store.

If any cookies end up on your computer (or whatever you call it in Euro-speak) they were put there without my knowledge.

Especially since that apparently means you're too stupid to block cookies and the like. Sheesh, it's the Twenty-First Century, people! 

I deny any responsibility for anything that may happen to you or your devices while visiting my subversive, pro-liberty, anti-authoritarian blog.

Unless you start agitating for your country to ditch the EU and EC, and start organizing on libertarian principles.  I'm all over taking credit for that.

And Google can go take a flying leap, too. Paying Word Press is looking better every day.

Associate Justice Scalia for Chief Justice!

I'd say President, but for who would be appointing his replacement...

"We Should Start Calling This Law SCOTUScare" And Scalia's 20 Other Epic Burns

GOAL Post 2015-1

FROM: GOAL goalwa@cox.net (Joe Waldron)
TO: undisclosed-recipients:
SUBJECT: GOAL Post 2015-1

Legislative Update from Olympia 9 January 2015

• "RALLY FOR YOUR RIGHTS" IN OLY
• LEGISLATURE CONVENES MONDAY, 12 JANUARY
• SPLIT CONTROL CONTINUES
• LEGISLATIVE TUTORIAL
• LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR
• PRE-FILED FIREARMS BILLS
• LEGISLATOR DIRECT CONTACT INFORMATION

Mark your calendar!  On Thursday, 15 January, a pro-gun rally, the Rally for Your Rights, will be held on the Capitol Campus in Olympia.  The rally is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m., with presentations by leaders in the gun rights movement and several legislators, followed by a visit to your legislators' offices.  This is your opportunity to speak directly with your elected officials.  Contact information will be available at the rally.  Sponsoring organizations include the Washington Arms Collectors, Washington State Rifle & Pistol Association, Gun Owners Action League of WA, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Second Amendment Foundation, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and others. 

The 64th Washington state legislature convenes Monday, January 12th for its long (105 day) session.  The principal focus of the long legislative session is supposed to be the biennial budget, but rest assured several other topics, including firearms, will receive attention. 

Control of the legislature remains split, with Democrats in charge of the House (51 Democrats to 47 Republicans), and Republicans continuing the Majority Coalition in the Senate, with 26 Majority Coalition members (25 Republicans and one Democrat) versus 23 Democrats.  We can also count on a handful of pro-gun House Democrats siding with gun owners on legislation of interest. 

For those new to legislative affairs, here’s how the process works:  When a bill is filed in the House or Senate (or both, simultaneously, called “companion bills”) it is assigned to a policy committee.  Most gun-related bills go to the Senate Law & Justice Committee in  the Senate.  In the House it’s a little more complicated, as it may be sent to House Judiciary or House Public Safety (most will go to Judiciary).  Public hearings may be held, after which the bill may (or may not) be voted out of committee.  If the bill has a fiscal impact (usually an expenditure of more than $50,000), it must then go to Senate Ways & Means or one of a couple of House fiscal committees.  The bill then goes to the Senate or House Rules Committee, where it must be voted on to pass out to the floor for a full vote. 

After a bill passes the Senate or House, it then goes over to the opposite chamber (House or Senate), where the whole process starts over again.  If the bill passes the second chamber in the same form it passed the first, it goes to the governor for signature (or veto or partial veto).  If changes are made in the second chamber, it goes back to the first for concurrence.  It may also go to a conference committee from both chambers to resolve differences.  The final version must pass both chambers. 

The bill then goes to the Governor, who may sign it into law, veto (kill) the bill, or sign a partial veto (killing just selected section(s) of the bill).  The governor may also allow a bill to become law without his signature.  Most signed bills take effect on 1 July, although bills with an “emergency clause” (considered immediately necessary for public safety) take effect upon signature by the governor.

One of the first items of business in each session is the adoption of the session calendar, identifying dates by which bills must clear various hurdles.  A bill that fails to clear the policy committee or chamber floor by the designated date is generally considered dead for the year, although they may be “resurrected” by parliamentary procedure.  I’ll post the cut-off dates for the 2015 session in the next issue of GOAL Post.

Bills from the last session are dead.  New bills must be filed for consideration by the 64th Legislature, with new bill numbers.  At this time no firearm-related bills have been pre-filed.

The Legislature has not yet published new telephone and office directories because legislators are not sworn in until Monday, 12 January.  The following links can be used at that time to identify direct contact information:

http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Senators/
http://www.leg.wa.gov/House/Representatives/

Legislative e-mail addresses will be available at http://app.leg.wa.gov/MemberEmail/Default.aspx

Your elected legislators and their contact information is available by inserting your residence zip code at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx