# Let's hear it for the fine citizens of Washington state.



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

A friend sent this to me in an email and I thought it very appropriate to post on this site. Those of you who live in Washington state and are familiar with this new law are more than encouraged to chime in with your thoughts and insight.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Washington State Gun owners stage the largest felony civil disobedience rally in American history

State Representative Elizabeth Scott noted that Founding Father Alexander Hamilton said any law that violates the Constitution is not valid, and there is a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws.
-by Jeffrey Phillips

Around 1,000 gun owners rallied at the state capitol in Olympia, WA, openly armed, this past Saturday in defiance of the newly passed gun control law, I-594.
"This isn't just a protest. We are here to openly violate the law" stated Gavin Seim, organizer of the event, named "I Will Not Comply."

At the end of the rally, gun owners burned their concealed weapons permits and signed a petition vowing to refuse to follow the new gun control law. The petition ended with the text, "We pledge our blood. We will not comply."

This certainly isn't the first large scale act of civil disobedience by gun owners in defiance of gun laws. Earlier this year in Connecticut hundreds of thousands of gun owners refused to send in their gun registration forms, also becoming felons. Similar numbers of gun owners in New York have also refused to send in their registration paperwork and some even video taped themselves burning the forms.

Fed up with the passage of an 18½-page incoherent, rambling, unconstitutional gun control initiative that was bankrolled by billionaires (the Hungarian Jewish NAZI George Soros ----- Michael Bloomberg just to name a couple), gun owners across Washington state held the largest felony civil disobedience rally in the nations history, brazenly titled "I Will Not Comply."

No one was hurt and no stores were looted. Between 1,000 and 3,000 lawful gun owners showed up openly armed at the state capitol in Olympia, Wash., on Saturday to defy the newly passed gun control law, I-594.

Organizer Gavin Seim made the extraordinary nature of the rally very clear, "This isn't just a protest. We are here to openly violate the law. Attendees publicly transferred their guns to each other in violation of I-591's background check provisions, and some even bought and sold guns just a few feet away from law enforcement. A fire pit blazed throughout the rally, and at the conclusion, gun owners lined up to burn their concealed weapons permits. A petition was circulated affirming gun owners refusal to follow I-594, which ended with, "We pledge our blood. We will not comply."
As the RSVPs in advance of the rally grew to over 6,000, the police, most who probably detest I-594, decided not to enforce the law.

The Washington State Patrol announced there would be no arrests for exchanging guns, not even for selling guns. Seim refused to obtain a permit to hold the rally, citing the right of people to peaceably assemble.

The rally could not be dismissed as fringe elements. Several lawmakers and lawmen spoke, including former Graham County Sheriff Richard Mack of Arizona, Washington State Rep. Elizabeth Scott (R-Monroe) and Rep. Graham Hunt (R-Orting), who sported an AR-15 during his speech. Mack advised gun owners engaging in civil disobedience to "put your sheriff next to you to keep it peaceful." Scott defiantly explained in her speech, "I will not comply with I-594 because it is unconstitutional, unenforceable and unjust. It is impossible to enforce this law unless there is a police officer on every back porch and in every living room. So it will be enforced selectively." She noted that Founding Father Alexander Hamilton said any law that violates the Constitution is not valid, and there is a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws.

Seim, a political activist and congressional candidate, wrote on his website, "Today I become an OUTLAW! Arrest me! I will NOT comply."

He led the rally peacefully, and at one point asked everyone attending to kneel with him in prayer. As he led the crowd in the Pledge of Allegiance, he stressed, "I am not pledging obedience to the government, it is to the Republic. We don't ask for our rights, and we don't negotiate for our rights. We will take America back."

Another speaker explained what was happening this way, "We no longer consent nor comply." Mike Vanderboegh, whose Three Percenter movement is modeled after the three percent of the colonists who fought in the American War of Independence, said that those at the rally are the resistance behind enemy lines. The resistance is also taking place in a handful of other states with strict gun control laws, where patriots are now smuggling in weapons illegally. Vanderboegh told attendees, "This is the tyranny the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Tyranny can be voted into existence by a majority. We will not fire the first shot, but if need be, we will fire the last."

Gun control zealots have finally gone too far. Gun owners are now discovering that the police in New York are using gun control laws to confiscate guns from family members within days after their owners pass away.Hundreds of thousands of gun owners in Connecticut and New York who failed to register their AR-15s earlier this year are now felons.

Requiring the registration of guns or requiring background checks, as I-594 does, allows the government to compile a list of gun owners, which can be used later for confiscation.
If guns cause crime, then why wasn't there a single mishap, considering there were 1,000 or so guns present and hundreds of violations of felony law taking place? Tellingly, Washington State Trooper Guy Gill predicted beforehand, "Most of these folks are responsible gun owners. We probably will not have an issue." The truth is, the state capitol was probably the safest place in the state last Saturday.

Patriots have had enough. The Second Amendment is gradually being eroded, state by state, and gun owners are not going to lie down and give up their arms.

A handful of billionaires and elitists in blue cities like Seattle do not respect the Constitution nor represent the vast majority of Americans. Another rally in Olympia is planned for January 15, and another one in Spokane on December 20.

The Second Amendment Foundation, headquartered in Bellevue, intends to sue the state over I-594, and will be lobbying the legislature to get the law changed or repealed. Washington state is now ground zero for patriotic gun owners resisting tyranny, which is at a tipping point since law enforcement does not intend to enforce I-594. What happens next?

Please share this with any legal gun owners you know to get them into the right mindset to help this happen nationwide.

[Editors Note. With no regard for the Constitution: Hillary Clinton, if elected, says she will ban guns and leave citizens defenseless. Barack Obama is working behind the scenes to ban guns.]


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

HUZZAH!

Off to a good start. I really appreciate this quote of Wash St Trooper Guy Gill:

" The truth is, the state capitol was probably the safest place in the state last Saturday."

I pray every protest promotes this sense of security and freedom.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Gutsy move, for sure. I approve, and if Texas ever starts to slip on 2A issues, I would definitely consider joining such a movement...although I've never been much of a 'joiner.'


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Although I don't think any of us can afford to sit back and assume that the situation in our states will not change, there appear to be isolated pockets of population, even in red states like SC, where there is strong anti gun sentiment. State representatives from these areas are becoming increasingly Democrap and bringing to the assembly and senate more and more of the anti gun mantra. Fortunately here, the Republicans are still in pretty strong control of both houses and the Governorship, but that situation could change with each election and we need to be vigilant. I assume that in Washington state, there are "covens" of libtards in the areas with higher economic wealth, bigger cities, etc, and those folks are the ones who are beginning to take control of the political process in their legislatures. This is what happened in NY 30 years ago, and now look where NY state is. Full of "felons" who have refused to register their AR's and other "assault" weapons with the State Police. Glad to see the folks in Washington standing up for their rights.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> A friend sent this to me in an email and I thought it very appropriate to post on this site. Those of you who live in Washington state and are familiar with this new law are more than encouraged to chime in with your thoughts and insight.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


Not only are those who failed to register their so called "assault rifles" felons in New York, but those who refused to surrender magazines that hold over 10 rounds. Can you imagine if every owner of what is now considered illegal and contraband in the State of New York staged a similar protest all at one time at every city hall throughout that God awful state? They wouldn't know what the hell to do with them all.

It would be nearly impossible to arrest each and every one of them. It would cripple the already broken criminal justice system as each and every one of them would have to go to trial. Not only that there is probably not enough jail space to house them all. None of this even takes into consideration the affect it would have on the state's economy if all of those productive members of society were in jail unable to earn a living. Or the number of businesses that would be affected.

There is strength in numbers. Just imagine if this were to take place in every state in the country all at the same time if these laws are passed on the federal level? Many state and local governments would also refuse to comply in particular the "Red" states, most of which have their own Constitutional provisions regarding "the bearing of arms" which are much stronger than the federal one.

Those who live in states with weak or non existent state Constitutional provisions will have a more difficult time beating back such oppressive legislation.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

SouthernBoy said:


> ...Attendees publicly transferred their guns to each other in violation of I-591's background check provisions, and some even bought and sold guns just a few feet away from law enforcement...the police, most who probably detest I-594, decided not to enforce the law...The Washington State Patrol announced there would be no arrests for exchanging guns, not even for selling guns...Several lawmakers and lawmen spoke, including former Graham County Sheriff Richard Mack of Arizona...Mack advised gun owners engaging in civil disobedience to "put your sheriff next to you to keep it peaceful." Scott defiantly explained in her speech, "I will not comply with I-594 because it is unconstitutional, unenforceable and unjust...


Very shortly after it passed (by popular-majority vote), every sheriff in Washington joined in announcing that none of them will enforce I-594.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Very shortly after it passed (by popular-majority vote), every sheriff in Washington joined in announcing that none of them will enforce I-594.


I knew there was a reason that I support LEO's. This is one of many. Officers of the law that have more common sense than the politicians who enact the laws. Thanks to every sheriff that pledged to not enforce such a ridiculous attempt to remove 2nd amendment rights.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

desertman said:


> Not only are those who failed to register their so called "assault rifles" felons in New York, but those who refused to surrender magazines that hold over 10 rounds. Can you imagine if every owner of what is now considered illegal and contraband in the State of New York staged a similar protest all at one time at every city hall throughout that God awful state? They wouldn't know what the hell to do with them all.
> 
> It would be nearly impossible to arrest each and every one of them. It would cripple the already broken criminal justice system as each and every one of them would have to go to trial. Not only that there is probably not enough jail space to house them all. None of this even takes into consideration the affect it would have on the state's economy if all of those productive members of society were in jail unable to earn a living. Or the number of businesses that would be affected.
> 
> ...


What they need to do is impeach the fascist dictator governor of New York, Andrew Mussolini Cuomo. His,father was a pretty decent governor, but this guy is just another example of the ruling class that say "do as a I say, not as I do, for I know,better than you what is best for all".


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Kudos to the protesters......:smt1099

If would have been more effective with a larger crowd......... 

The Washington state population in 2014 was 7.062 million...... So this protest was akin to a grain of sand on the beach.... Just saying.........


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Cait43 said:


> ...[It] would have been more effective with a larger crowd...


When you count those 1,000 against the usual crowd conjured up by Idiotic Moms Against Self Defense, normally under 100, you can see that it was large enough.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> When you count those 1,000 against the usual crowd conjured up by Idiotic Moms Against Self Defense, normally under 100, you can see that it was large enough.


But it needs to be maintained and continued until the opposition realizes what they are losing by agreeing to give up their rights


----------



## AirForceShooter (May 6, 2006)

But they keep electing these idiots.

AFS


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

AirForceShooter said:


> But they keep electing these idiots.
> 
> AFS


Therin lies the problem, as johnathan gruber said "the stupidly of the American voter" never ceases to amaze me. It's time to get rid of all the political correctness and tell it like it is. Much of our society and parts of this country have degraded to the point where the only way to stay safe is to stay armed.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Very shortly after it passed (by popular-majority vote), every sheriff in Washington joined in announcing that none of them will enforce I-594.


This is a good thing and how the county sheriffs should respond in adherence to their oath of service. Good for them.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> When you count those 1,000 against the usual crowd conjured up by Idiotic Moms Against Self Defense, normally under 100, you can see that it was large enough.


This is precisely what takes place on Lobby Day in Richmond, VA (held in January). Usually there are well over 1,000 people (more like 1,200 to 1,500) gathered at capital square to lobby for pro-gun bills and against anti-gun bills. There are always some anti groups there as well, the mom's group for example, but their numbers are very low, especially when compared to our turnout.

Another thing I have noticed. We gun people are well behaved, not vulgar, and respectful whereas the anti groups nothing of the sort. They use foul language, shout at us, and call us names. Kinda tells you what caliber of people they really are.

As us always the case, as we stroll through the legislative office building in search of delegates to present our case, we are armed. We are always welcomed into the delegates' offices, our sidearms included, to present our case and listen to the delegates respond. This year one delegate did not want us to enter her office. She was clearly uncomfortable with gaggles of armed citizens in her presence and would not allow any of us in unless we disarmed. She was from the county in Virginia that is most like San Francisco in its liberalism; Arlington. Not a surprise there.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

RK3369 said:


> *What they need to do is impeach the fascist dictator governor of New York, Andrew Mussolini Cuomo.* His,father was a pretty decent governor, but this guy is just another example of the ruling class that say "do as a I say, not as I do, for I know,better than you what is best for all".


That will never happen in the State of New York. It like California is hopelessly gone.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

SouthernBoy said:


> This is precisely what takes place on Lobby Day in Richmond, VA (held in January). Usually there are well over 1,000 people (more like 1,200 to 1,500) gathered at capital square to lobby for pro-gun bills and against anti-gun bills. There are always some anti groups there as well, the mom's group for example, but their numbers are very low, especially when compared to our turnout.
> 
> Another thing I have noticed. We gun people are well behaved, not vulgar, and respectful whereas the anti groups nothing of the sort. They use foul language, shout at us, and call us names. Kinda tells you what caliber of people they really are.
> 
> As us always the case, as we stroll through the legislative office building in search of delegates to present our case, we are armed. We are always welcomed into the delegates' offices, our sidearms included, to present our case and listen to the delegates respond. This year one delegate did not want us to enter her office. She was clearly uncomfortable with gaggles of armed citizens in her presence and would not allow any of us in unless we disarmed. She was from the county in Virginia that is most like San Francisco in its liberalism; Arlington. Not a surprise there.


As a delegate she clearly showed her prejudicial disrespectful attitude towards the law abiding citizens.

I don't understand how somebody would have disarmed themselves without a proper notice ahead of time, unless they were CCW she wouldn't have known. Expecting somebody to bring their firearms back to their vehicles would be careless and possibly obvious to a few opportunists who are hanging around waiting for a criminal opportunity .
Maybe she provided a gun check in, lol.

Im assuming most gun carriers were open carrying to express their right to carry.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

This is getting to be a serious problem when voters are disenfranchised. Especially when votes are divided by geographical areas.

That a plethora of sheriffs refuses to enforce this law is IMO the most serious problem because functionally they are to enforce law.
Thank God we have a republic where discriminatory, biased, even unconstitutional laws can be challenged and disobeyed until rational thinking can correct the miscarriage.

Yet even if societies divide and form new states, eventually a capital must be established and the disease of bureaucracy festers anew.

But then maybe its not only bureaucracy, but both political apathy and ineptitude. 
We the people still vote these idiots in.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

pic said:


> As a delegate she clearly showed her prejudicial disrespectful attitude towards the law abiding citizens.
> 
> I don't understand how somebody would have disarmed themselves without a proper notice ahead of time, unless they were CCW she wouldn't have known. Expecting somebody to bring their firearms back to their vehicles would be careless and possibly obvious to a few opportunists who are hanging around waiting for a criminal opportunity .
> Maybe she provided a gun check in, lol.


She wanted us to leave our firearms with the receptionist whom, I assume, would have put them into a desk drawer. Is this ignorant or what?



pic said:


> Im assuming most gun carriers were open carrying to express their right to carry.


You assumption is correct. The overwhelming majority were carrying their guns openly.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

CW said:


> This is getting to be a serious problem when voters are disenfranchised. Especially when votes are divided by geographical areas.
> 
> *That a plethora of sheriffs refuses to enforce this law is IMO the most serious problem because functionally they are to enforce law.*
> Thank God we have a republic where discriminatory, biased, even unconstitutional laws can be challenged and disobeyed until rational thinking can correct the miscarriage.
> ...


Their state constitution, and the federal constitution, take precedence and trump any laws to the contrary. So in choosing not to abide by and carry out illegal laws, they are honoring their oath of service.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> As us always the case, as we stroll through the legislative office building in search of delegates to present our case, we are armed. We are always welcomed into the delegates' offices, our sidearms included, to present our case and listen to the delegates respond.


Your gun laws are clearly superior to ours. In SC, you can never carry open unless engaged in hunting, and you can never carry concealed into a governmental office.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Just saw this a moment ago on another site.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copied and Pasted from Washington Attorney General's webpage. 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 
Sep 7 2016
OLYMPIA – Attorney General Bob Ferguson, joined by a broad coalition of over 50 community leaders and elected officials, today announced he will submit agency request legislation in the 2017 session to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

The bill would ban weapons like the AR-15 used to kill three teens and wound another at a party in Mukilteo in July. Reports indicate that the shooter used a 30-round magazine in that incident, which would also be banned under Ferguson’s proposal.

Ferguson’s proposed legislation has two key elements:

A ban on semiautomatic weapons with military-style features that render them more easily concealable or more deadly; and
A limit on magazine capacity – currently unlimited under Washington law – to a maximum of 10 rounds of ammunition.
“The recent tragedy in Mukilteo drives home the need to act with urgency to end the availability of weapons designed with only one purpose – to kill people,” Ferguson said. “I have a duty to protect the public, as well as uphold the constitution. My proposal will ban some of the deadliest weapons, while respecting the Second Amendment right to bear arms.”

Sen. David Frockt (D-46) and Sen. Kevin Ranker (D-40) are working with Ferguson to craft the legislation. The proposal will be modeled after successful assault weapon laws in other states, such as New York and Connecticut. The courts have determined these states’ bans to be constitutional.

Unlike the bans in some other states, Ferguson’s proposal targets only sales, grandfathering current gun ownership. The legislation would not require registration of existing weapons.

On July 30, three more young people were killed when a troubled 19-year-old opened fire on a party in Mukilteo – reportedly using an AR-15, a military-style semiautomatic weapon that would be restricted under Ferguson’s proposal.

This legislation will save lives.

A review of mass shootings between January 2009 and January 2013 by Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that incidents where assault weapons or large capacity ammunition magazines were used resulted in 135% more people shot and 57% more killed, compared to other mass shootings.

When a gunman terrorized Seattle Pacific University with a double-barreled shotgun in 2014, student John Meis heroically tackled and disarmed the gunman while he was reloading. Even more Washingtonians might have been shot if this weapon held more rounds and had the assault-style features of the alleged Mukilteo shooter’s weapon.

A recent poll presented by Washington Ceasefire and Ceasefire Oregon showed that 65 percent of adults in the two states – including a great many gun owners – favor an assault weapons ban and want lawmakers to act.

Attorney General Ferguson will file this legislation in December.

-30-

The Office of the Attorney General is the chief legal office for the state of Washington with attorneys and staff in 27 divisions across the state providing legal services to roughly 200 state agencies, boards and commissions. Visit Washington State | Office of the Attorney General to learn more.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

RK3369 said:


> Your gun laws are clearly superior to ours. In SC, you can never carry open unless engaged in hunting, and you can never carry concealed into a governmental office.


We do have more freedom than do folks in your state. We have no laws regarding open carry, which means you can open carry with or without a permit. We can carry into restaurants that serve alcohol for consumption on the premises (ABC-ON), open or concealed, but can only imbibe alcohol when OC'ing (we tend to frown on drinking when carrying). Bars don't count since there are no bars in Virginia. I do know that your governor signed a bill into law last year allowing people to carry into establishments that serve alcohol.

Yes, I am pretty aware of the laws in SC. But please do answer a few questions for me, if you will.

I have been told that I can carry into banks in SC but I don't think I have actually done this in the past. Is this true (of course, providing the subject bank has no policy against this)?

Can I open carry while in my car in SC?


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> We do have more freedom than do folks in your state. We have no laws regarding open carry, which means you can open carry with or without a permit. We can carry into restaurants that serve alcohol for consumption on the premises (ABC-ON), open or concealed, but can only imbibe alcohol when OC'ing (we tend to frown on drinking when carrying). Bars don't count since there are no bars in Virginia. I do know that your governor signed a bill into law last year allowing people to carry into establishments that serve alcohol.
> 
> Yes, I am pretty aware of the laws in SC. But please do answer a few questions for me, if you will.
> 
> ...


we can carry "concealed" into restaurants serving alcohol "but can not consume alcohol while carrying". That is, of course, providing you have a Concealed Weapons Permit or a reciprocal permit from another state.

I have "concealed carried" into banks most of the time since I began carrying about 4 years ago. Banks here generally have no prohibitions other than there may be a specific corporate prohibition against concealed weapons, but if that is the case, a clearly posted size required sign of a handgun with a black circle around it and a diagonal black line prominently posted at all entrance doors is the only legally enforceable prohibition against carrying concealed into any business establishment. Even if the owner has a handwritten sign on the door saying something like 'no weapons, concealed or open or you will be arrested", it's not legally enforceable. You can be asked to leave by the owner and by the police but the owner can not force the police to arrest you for carrying onto his property unless the posted signs are legal. Most likely, a carrier would simply leave and tell the owner why he won't be getting any of the carrier's money in the future considering his stance on guns.

Open carry in a car could be a legal hassle. Generally it is illegal to carry openly anywhere in SC unless you are hunting. The single exception to that is that you can openly carry on "your own property." In SC, your car is also considered your "personal property" and you can carry a handgun in your car concealed in a glove box or console, even without a permit. A concealed weapons permit holder can carry a weapon concealed on their person also in a car, but generally due to the CWP. While I do not believe that there is a specific prohibition against carrying openly in your car because it is considered your personal property, on the other hand, I don't know anyone who does it nor do I know of any cases that have come to trial over the issue. I guess it still remains to be seen whether or not it will be considered "legal" to openly carry in your car based on it being your personal property, or not, because it is not your "real" property such as your home and land. The fact that you can legally carry concealed without a permit in your car on the premise that it is a part of your personal property could probably be used as a strong argument to also allow open carry in your personal car, but I don't think there is any case law on that just yet.

I think that case is still waiting to be made, one way or the other. To be safe, since a LEO would not be expecting to see it, I'd not do it. Stick it in your pocket or IWB holster and don't get the policeman nervous. Our LEO's are very tolerant of people carrying when properly permitted, but they would not be expecting to see one out in plain view. It would definitely raise questions and maybe some angst on the part of the officer. And in certain areas, might even get you hauled out of the car and handcuffed. Some of the city areas where there is a lot of crime the police act first and ask questions later. Just the way it is.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Kevin Ranker is our State Senator.
We'll contact him about this.

Normally, Ranker is a good guy. But this proposal is really stupid.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Kevin Ranker is our State Senator.
> We'll contact him about this.
> 
> Normally, Ranker is a good guy. But this proposal is really stupid.


That's he way it began in NY. The Governor said they needed an assault weapons ban and within a month, he had one rammed through the legislature and signed into law. No public comment, no opportunity to marshall opposition, just ramrodded through and into law.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I feel bad for those of you that live in states that make it hard or impossible to carry open or concealed. 

Here in AZ., we can do both without any hassle or permit. Hell, if we jump thru a few hoops, we can even own full-auto firearms. :smt1099


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

paratrooper said:


> I feel bad for those of you that live in states that make it hard or impossible to carry open or concealed.
> 
> Here in AZ., we can do both without any hassle or permit. Hell, if we jump thru a few hoops, we can even own full-auto firearms. :smt1099


We can carry openly without a permit. In fact, that is the normal mode of carry here, whereas carrying concealed is the exception. And we can also own fully automatic firearms.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

CW said:


> This is getting to be a serious problem when voters are disenfranchised. Especially when votes are divided by geographical areas.
> 
> That a plethora of sheriffs refuses to enforce this law is IMO the most serious problem because functionally they are to enforce law.
> Thank God we have a republic where discriminatory, biased, even unconstitutional laws can be challenged and disobeyed until rational thinking can correct the miscarriage.
> ...


Maybe the police are obeying the law and , or their oath. The constitution is included in their oath.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> We can carry openly without a permit. In fact, that is the normal mode of carry here, whereas carrying concealed is the exception. And we can also own fully automatic firearms.


Interesting you have those freedoms considering your proximity to the head of the Socialist enclave of Washington, "D"istrict of "C"ommunism. However, be on your guard. Your Libtard Governor and his Libtard AG and working hard to restrict your rights, even as we post on the internet.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

RK3369 said:


> Interesting you have those freedoms considering your proximity to the head of the Socialist enclave of Washington, "D"istrict of "C"ommunism. However, be on your guard. Your Libtard Governor and his Libtard AG and working hard to restrict your rights, even as we post on the internet.


Yeah, I kinda' wondered the same thing? My guess is because the majority of the state's legislature is Republican and decidedly pro-gun and has been for a long time. I believe that Virginia is mostly rural which accounts for that. Because of that Gov. McAwful and AG Mark Herring really can't do shit. The people who live in Fairfax County are the ones that are responsible for screwing up the state. I believe that is where the majority of the state's population resides. Because of that they now have McAuliffe or "McAwful" a detestable swine to be sure and another detestable swine, Tim Kaine as senator who is also the pathological lying bitch's running mate. As long as the legislature remains Republican I don't think Virginians will have too much to worry about regarding 2nd Amendment issues. They too have a very specific Constitutional provision regarding the bearing of arms.

I'm not too familiar with Virginia's political situation. Those are just my opinions based on what little I know. Perhaps "SB" could weigh in. 
https://newrepublic.com/article/115...-control-stance-virginia-gives-issue-new-life


----------



## AZdave (Oct 23, 2015)

Democrats cannot come up with a new idea. This Frockt-Ranker assault ban bill, is just the failed Brady Bill at the state level. Uh let's pay for it by taxing the rich! 

What will be the definition of an assault weapon? Big magazines, black and scary? Sounds racist to me.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

desertman said:


> Yeah, I kinda' wondered the same thing? My guess is because the majority of the state's legislature is Republican and decidedly pro-gun and has been for a long time. I believe that Virginia is mostly rural which accounts for that. Because of that Gov. McAwful and AG Mark Herring really can't do shit. The people who live in Fairfax County are the ones that are responsible for screwing up the state. I believe that is where the majority of the state's population resides. Because of that they now have McAuliffe or "McAwful" a detestable swine to be sure and another detestable swine, Tim Kaine as senator who is also the pathological lying bitch's running mate. As long as the legislature remains Republican I don't think Virginians will have too much to worry about regarding 2nd Amendment issues. They too have a very specific Constitutional provision regarding the bearing of arms.
> 
> I'm not too familiar with Virginia's political situation. Those are just my opinions based on what little I know. Perhaps "SB" could weigh in.
> https://newrepublic.com/article/115...-control-stance-virginia-gives-issue-new-life


40 years ago or so New York was pretty conservative. Had a long time republican governor, Nelson Rockefeller who was conservative and ran the state that way, even though he was from the lower Hudson valley area. Then things started to shift in the 70's 80's and 90's so now all you have is a few upstate conservative legislators who have no power and the downstate lower Hudson valley and Long Island democratic big Union supported machine that runs the state. In 30 years or so the state has gone from largely red to mostly blue because of big money and big power in those areas of the state where you never see a gun or a deer or anything wild. Basically half the state population controls the entire state political process. Just be forewarned. The infestation in Washington is coming your way into Virginia also.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

RK3369 said:


> Interesting you have those freedoms considering your proximity to the head of the Socialist enclave of Washington, "D"istrict of "C"ommunism.


One could certainly think that. I live around 35 miles from Washington, DC so out here it is much more conservative than what you would see in the closer in communities.



RK3369 said:


> However, be on your guard. Your Libtard Governor and his Libtard AG and working hard to restrict your rights, even as we post on the internet.


Ain't that the truth. They're both idiots.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> Yeah, I kinda' wondered the same thing? My guess is because the majority of the state's legislature is Republican and decidedly pro-gun and has been for a long time. I believe that Virginia is mostly rural which accounts for that. Because of that Gov. McAwful and AG Mark Herring really can't do shit. The people who live in Fairfax County are the ones that are responsible for screwing up the state. I believe that is where the majority of the state's population resides. Because of that they now have McAuliffe or "McAwful" a detestable swine to be sure and another detestable swine, Tim Kaine as senator who is also the pathological lying bitch's running mate. As long as the legislature remains Republican I don't think Virginians will have too much to worry about regarding 2nd Amendment issues. They too have a very specific Constitutional provision regarding the bearing of arms.
> 
> I'm not too familiar with Virginia's political situation. Those are just my opinions based on what little I know. Perhaps "SB" could weigh in.
> https://newrepublic.com/article/115...-control-stance-virginia-gives-issue-new-life


You're pretty much dead on with your assessment. However, it's more than just Fairfax County. Northern Virginia has 2.8 million people, which is around 35% of the entire population of the state. Then you have to add Richmond and parts of the Tidewater to poison the well a little bit more. Our republican edge in the general assembly helps a great deal in keeping the lid on the dreams of McAwful and Herring to a large extent. Sadly, the state went for the commie Obama in both elections. What an embarrassment.

Much of the problem is the fact that Northern Virginia has so many foreigners (both from abroad and northern states) that traditional Virginia values have been polluted to the point of us natives of NOVA only comprising about 20% of the demographics. These people come here and bring their foreign ideas and concepts with them instead of embracing ours. It hurts.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

That is also starting to happen in SC in areas like Charleston and Columbia. More and more Democrats all the time. Heck, I don't think a Republican could win the mayoral or any city council race in Charleston any more. Charleston county government is mostly Republican but the city government is mostly Democraps.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

RK3369 said:


> 40 years ago or so New York was pretty conservative. Had a long time republican governor, Nelson Rockefeller who was conservative and ran the state that way, even though he was from the lower Hudson valley area. Then things started to shift in the 70's 80's and 90's so now all you have is a few upstate conservative legislators who have no power and the downstate lower Hudson valley and Long Island democratic big Union supported machine that runs the state. In 30 years or so the state has gone from largely red to mostly blue because of big money and big power in those areas of the state where you never see a gun or a deer or anything wild. Basically half the state population controls the entire state political process. Just be forewarned. *The infestation in Washington is coming your way into Virginia also.*



Actually I'm in Arizona, I thank God for that. I don't see it happening here, damn near everyone is armed.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

RK3369 said:


> That is also starting to happen in SC in areas like Charleston and Columbia. More and more Democrats all the time. Heck, I don't think a Republican could win the mayoral or any city council race in Charleston any more. Charleston county government is mostly Republican but the city government is mostly Democraps.


I hate to see that since one day I hope to move to the Palmetto state's lowcountry.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> I hate to see that since one day I hope to move to the Palmetto state's lowcountry.


It's still pretty red here, just not in the city. Surburbs are full of mostly "normal" people.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

One thing that's really important is to find out if your state has a pre-emption statute. If not every county or municipality can make up their own firearms laws which can be more restrictive than the states. What's legal in your home town may be illegal in your neighbors and so forth. In addition these laws can change from one day to the next, making it exceedingly difficult to comply especially while traveling through these jurisdictions. It's much easier to defeat oppressive laws on the state level than on the local level. Especially in states that have a large rural population.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> One thing that's really important is to find out if your state has a pre-emption statute. If not every county or municipality can make up their own firearms laws which can be more restrictive than the states. What's legal in your home town may be illegal in your neighbors and so forth. In addition these laws can change from one day to the next, making it exceedingly difficult to comply especially while traveling through these jurisdictions. It's much easier to defeat oppressive laws on the state level than on the local level. Especially in states that have a large rural population.


We've had preemption here since, I think, 1987. Without it, carrying would be a nightmare.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Same in SC. Localities can not enact more strict laws than the state law.


----------



## CW (Mar 20, 2015)

pic said:


> Maybe the police are obeying the law and , or their oath. The constitution is included in their oath.


I think that the sheriffs are clearly demonstrating that the voters have indeed elected[or had appointed] intelligent and responsible individuals 
who can clearly delineate between politicalbs which subverts the constitution and rational legislation which defines and penalizes conduct which poses a threat to the public.


----------

