Comments

1

"Washington state is the only state that has gun control on the ballot for this midterm election."

Nathalie, Washington is one of a small handful of states that permits lawmaking through a popular initiative process. Were you under the impression that more states followed this process or something?

2

This measure wipes out HIPA regulations for gun owners. Another reason good folks will vote NO.

3

@2 I guess that might be a reason for gun-owners (I have no opinion of if its a good one or not)

Everybody else? Not so much.

4

@2: HIPAA.

https://yeson1639.org/learn-more/
12. Is there a “medical privacy waiver” in Initiative 1639?
Current law incorporates language in a buyer’s application to purchase a handgun that allows local law enforcement to access the most up-to-date information regarding whether a person is prohibited from possessing a firearm because of an involuntary commitment. I-1639 extends the same background check requirements and application language that has been in place for decades for handguns, to semi-automatic assault rifles, in order to prevent someone in a time of crisis from gaining access to military grade assault rifles. No other medical information is waived before purchasing a firearm.

IDGAF if "folks" are good or bad or some combination of both, as long as they vote YES. the sky isn't falling.

5

@2 What are you talking about? Existing Washington law already required health care providers to report information upon the request of law enforcement or a court for the purchase of handguns. See RCW 9.41.097. I-1639 simply extends this to semiautomatic rifles, and also allows the state to request this information as well (the state requests would fall under a state background check system if enacted by the legislature or through popular initiative, so it's a moot point for now).

Are you getting your information from the NRA or something? Might want to look at the actual text of the initiative, it's all right there in black and white: https://www.sos.wa.gov/assets/elections/initiatives/finaltext1531.pdf

6

@4/5: Thanks. As this underscores the "slippery slope" of this initiative. And of course, this in turn would inhibit gun owners from seeking mental health counseling and treatment precisely because of this law.

And of course, gun owners are in violation if they:
- Have a loaded gun ready for protection in their nightstand.
- Give or lend guns to family or friends.

7

Truth is gun lovers need killings like this. It's what makes their hobby exciting. Like sky diving. If no one ever plummeted to their death, there'd be a lot less skydivers. If no one ever committed a mass murder with guns, there'd be a lot less gun lovers. It's the thrill of danger. Adrenaline. People get their kicks in lots of different ways

8

@6 Firearms purchasers have had to consent to disclosure of health information for decades. A number of agencies, like the VA, have been reporting mental health problems to the federal background check database since the Clinton presidency.

To the extent there is a slope, we slipped to the bottom if it long before this initiative was on the ballot.

9

@1 you are internetsplaining the relevance of the initiative to the author of the article you're supposed to have read? Article that said "It’s this initiative process that may have given Washington a leg up on gun safety measures compared to other states"?

To be fair, you did have FIRST POST, maybe you finished the article later.

10

7

That’s a whole lotta frothy projecting you are doing there.

11

yeah, a terrible one, that will likely be found unconstitutional. some of my friends who are 100% full on gun control advocates, marcher's for our lives, have already voted 'NO' on this one, cuz they read it in full, from an unbiased source.

12

@2 & @6, @7, and @10: You three really should cut your sugar intake.Take it from Rich and Michael--that candy corn's a killer.
@11: You and your friends were either misled or must not have read the initiative very carefully.

Everybody vote YES on I-1639 already!

13

@9 The whole premise of the article is dumb. I mean, Republican controlled Ohio has meaningful gun legislation advancing in their state legislature--but it's not "on the ballot," so the author ignores it. There are less than 10 states that would ever have a gun initiative on the ballot; the fact that one currently does is actually a pretty good sign of progress.

14

@10,
I noticed you didn't disagree though

15

14

Do you need things spelled out to you that much?

Christ, do you need a map to find the bathroom every night as well?

Go ahead, keep those frothy projections coming. They are fun to laugh at.

16

If anything this so called "gun safety initiative" will make thing more dangerous by deterring people from seeking mental healthcare.

Vote no!

17

@16 That was the argument raised years ago in response to proposed requirements to report mental health issues to NCIS. It hasn't turned out that way at all: there's no evidence that the reporting requirements deter folks from seeking treatment. So, no need to worry, that particular concern was hashed out long ago, and found to be baseless.

18

@17 Dammit. NICS (the federal background check database), not NCIS (the prolific TV show with numerous spinoffs).

19

@15,

You appear to be the overly excitable one here. If you've got a refutation of anything I've mentioned I'd love to hear the details, otherwise I'll just assume you're out of ideas.

20

So...under this law my .22LR Marlin 60 is redefined as an "assault rifle"? That is fucking ludicrous, laughable. If we're going to have gun control, can we at least have it written from a moderate perspective, and an informed one???

The extremists at both ends of the 'confiscate 'em all!!!' / 'no gun control never ever!!!' debate just are not helpful, or worth listening to - and we certainly should not be approving initiatives authored by them - on either side.


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.