search
top

I-594 Update

Since I’ve been away, I thought I’d give an update on the happenings with I-594 in Washington State. The media is already doing ground prep for the narrative that the implementation of I-594 is essentially no big deal, and what are all those stupid gun owners complaining about anyway. Expect to see a lot of this as the media tries to run cover for Bloomberg’s project.

Remember there is going to be a rally at the Capitol in Olympia on the 15th of this month to protest I-594. Joe Huffman is going to be a speaker at the rally. I think it’s important that lawmakers see a significant presence. The previous non-compliance rally drew about 1000 people from various accounts, but to really make an impact on lawmakers, it needs to be something they don’t often see. If you live in Washington, I’d make plans to go.

Also, SAF has filed suit against I-594 in court. The suit is on both Second Amendment and vagueness grounds. It doesn’t challenge the concept of background checks on change of title per se, but it really doesn’t need to. All they need to show is that the definition of “transfer” in the law is constitutionally untenable. Despite whatever severance clause may be in the law, the core of the law hinges on that definition, and the court should toss the entire law if it’s written too broadly or vaguely. It would then be up to the legislature to either fix it, or for Bloomberg and his allies to spent millions more trying to hoodwink voters again.

4 Responses to “I-594 Update”

  1. TS says:

    The author of the first link even admits he broke the law. But hey, he didn’t get arrested for it so it’s cool- nothing to complain about.

    Technically, I was not supposed to handle the firearm at all until the background check was complete and the seller was notified, but the gun had no ammunition and I probably looked harmless. In any case, there was no way anyone there was going to enforce the rule.

  2. Chase says:

    That first link was not defending the anti-I-594 position. I was therefore pleasantly amazed that it wasn’t scathing, sarcastic, and full of sexual harassment, like so many opinion pieces I’ve read about gun owners. I’d like to be argued against this way more often!

  3. Jason says:

    How is one to decide if the want to buy a firearm WITHOUT HANDLING OR PHYSICALLY INSPECTING IT? That means, it must be in your hands so that you may carefully look at it. Under this law, are we supposed to go through a background check BEFORE we inspect a firearm we wish to buy? What if we don;t like it or the way it feels, handles or find some blemish/damage on it? Can we immediately do another background check on the person who just sold it to us, return the firearm and get our money back?

  4. Roger V. Tranfaglia says:

    To the first three posters………YEEAAA…Come on! Get with the schedule!! If you don’t obey the law…I’m telling!……..your MOM!…………….really,really.

top