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 08-28-2014, 09:39 AM
 
662 posts, read 1,049,008 times
Reputation: 450

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven View Post
The Constitution of the State of Washington says:
"SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men."

That seems to be VERY clear!
Will this law, if passed, stand the test of Constitutionality?
Sure seems to me it will "impair" the "right of the individual citizen to bear arms..."
We will just have to wait and see how the courts in Washington rule.
IF it passes.
Washington State has plenty of bears. They just need to let them breed more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-28-2014, 09:40 AM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,550 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
First of all, that's a moronic headline from the DB. Gates has long been anti-gun. He supported another gun-control measure in 1997 which lost 71-29 at the polls. Gates is supposedly so anti gun that he refuses to use armed security--kind of dumb for one of the world's richest men, whose family could be a target for kidnapping for ransom.

Secondly the DB article conveniently neglects to report that I-594 is already opposed by the largest police organization in the state, along with the WA state law enforcement firearms trainers org.

Thirdly, there is already a thread on this in 'elections.'

http://www.city-data.com/forum/elect...ny-up-big.html
Based on a google search, the Organization you named is an advocacy group, not an actual police organization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2014, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Billings, MT
9,884 posts, read 10,974,080 times
Reputation: 14180
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbyBobble View Post
Washington State has plenty of bears. They just need to let them breed more.
I take it then, that you have no intelligent comment to make about Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution and how it may or may not relate to the pending Initiative?
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:59 AM.

© 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