Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-24-2014, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,366,997 times
Reputation: 7990

Advertisements

Money starts to flow in for gun initiatives | www.kirotv.com

Billionaire Microsoft co-founder and Seattle Seahawks owner Paul Allen just forked over $500,000 for Initiative 594, a gun control law that will be voted on this fall in Washington state. In WA, any citizen can draft legislation, and if enough signatures are collected by supporters, the law goes before the voters to be approved or rejected. This is the route by which the wacky tobacky was recently legalized here.

Bill Gates has donated $50,000. Nick Hanauer, an early investor in Amazon, tops the list, having donated $490,000 and having pledged to give $530,000 more. Steve Ballmer also gave $600,000.

Jim Sinegal of Costco donated just $10,000--I guess he is tapped out after spending $20 million to get booze sales legalized here in 2011.

On the other side, the 4,500 member Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs, along with the Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association, have announced opposition to I-594. Initiative 676 was a gun control initiative in 1997. It was overwhelmingly opposed by police, and that turned out to be key. I-676 went down by a whopping 71-29 margin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-25-2014, 05:35 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,222,338 times
Reputation: 17209
A lot of money to simply have the Supreme Court invalidate the law even if it passes.


I suppose they may be considering this target advertising.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2014, 05:37 AM
 
16,431 posts, read 22,204,998 times
Reputation: 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
A lot of money to simply have the Supreme Court invalidate the law even if it passes.


I suppose they may be considering this target advertising.
This one maybe. Obama may get another appointee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2014, 08:43 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,222,338 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
This one maybe. Obama may get another appointee.
At best he replaces Ginsberg which doesn't change anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2014, 04:14 AM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,219 posts, read 22,376,569 times
Reputation: 23858
Ginsberg isn't going anywhere. I don't think Obama will have an opportunity for another replacement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2014, 06:04 AM
 
1,020 posts, read 1,377,877 times
Reputation: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Ginsberg isn't going anywhere. I don't think Obama will have an opportunity for another replacement.
No, but Hillary will!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2014, 08:41 AM
 
15,047 posts, read 8,876,449 times
Reputation: 9510
Quote:
Originally Posted by notasmoker View Post
No, but Hillary will!
I've been on the fence about voting for Hillary should she get the nomination, but this is one thing that will weigh heavily in her favor in making that decision.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2014, 12:02 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,237,274 times
Reputation: 9845
When I read gun control I got excited and then I read the fine print and what this law does, are you ready for it?.... is to require background checks. No seriously, this is it.

Isn't this just common sense? You've got to be stone cold nut to be against this. Hasn't the gun nuts been saying we don't have a gun problem, we have a mental health problem? Well, here is a law that can help fix that.

Think about, people who are against this law is basically saying, "I don't give a S--- whether I'm selling my gun to a psycho and if my name ends up in CNN as the supplier, hell I just say, hey what he does with it is none of my business!"

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2014, 12:13 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,503,289 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:

The measure will also criminalize, with few exceptions, all temporary
transfers of possession of firearms that do not involve purchases, such as for
safekeeping, hunting, loan, recreational sharing, safety training, coaching,
transport, etc.
Quote:

The measure also requires that dealers who are facilitating gun transfers, be
they through the licensed dealer or a private seller, receive confirmation in
writing from the chief of police or sheriff that the purchaser in question "is
eligible to possess a
http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Un...tive_594_(2014)

There are very good reasons to oppose this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2014, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,366,997 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
When I read gun control I got excited and then I read the fine print and what this law does, are you ready for it?.... is to require background checks. No seriously, this is it.

Isn't this just common sense? You've got to be stone cold nut to be against this. Hasn't the gun nuts been saying we don't have a gun problem, we have a mental health problem? Well, here is a law that can help fix that.

Think about, people who are against this law is basically saying, "I don't give a S--- whether I'm selling my gun to a psycho and if my name ends up in CNN as the supplier, hell I just say, hey what he does with it is none of my business!"

.
The law is 18 pages long. You've got to be stone cold nuts to think that 18 pages can be perfectly and entirely summarized in three words: "require background checks."

I think this may prove to be a major hurdle for 1194. The rule of initiatives is, when in doubt voters vote "no." And complexity breeds doubt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:11 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top