Politics Paul Allen gives $500K to Washington gun initiative

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I'm fine with extended background checks. Can we have upgraded checks so "law abiding citizens" have ability to have concealed weapons and extended ammo mags too?

If a citizen will allow you to go deep into their background, let's give those that are awesome like me a chance to have good weapons for the criminals that buy guns without checks. Fully automatic weapons!
 
No surprise that all the slave owners lead the gun confiscation march.
 
magnifier661 said:
I'm fine with extended background checks. Can we have upgraded checks so "law abiding citizens" have ability to have concealed weapons and extended ammo mags too?

If a citizen will allow you to go deep into their background, let's give those that are awesome like me a chance to have good weapons for the criminals that buy guns without checks. Fully automatic weapons!
Click to expand...

You bet. I would sort of like to pick up a Ma Duce for the bow to help through the rough spots.
 
Treaty_of_Batum said:
Hope 594 passes and then Oregon tires to copy it.
Click to expand...

Really? So let's say you are at the range and you let your friend borrow your gun so he can shoot with you. Now you must go to the nearest dealer to do a quick background check or you have a felony?

Seems a little too much no?
 
magnifier661 said:
Really? So let's say you are at the range and you let your friend borrow your gun so he can shoot with you. Now you must go to the nearest dealer to do a quick background check or you have a felony?

Seems a little too much no?
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound like an accurate portrayal of the proposal to me. As far as I can see it is talking about ownership transfer?

barfo
 
barfo said:
Doesn't sound like an accurate portrayal of the proposal to me. As far as I can see it is talking about ownership transfer?

barfo
Click to expand...

I was lead to believe that the term transfer in this proposition is even "borrowing".
 
magnifier661 said:
Yes I believe I am correct.

"(25) "Transfer" means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans."

If you loan out your gun, the person must go through a background check

http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf
Click to expand...

I suppose one could interpret deliver as loan. I like the idea of not being able to just give a gun to someone else, but you bring up a good point on how the the measure could create situations that would be unduly harsh.

I'm still for the measure but would like to see it clarified for it not apply to those very limited situations. If not, I still think the measure as a whole outweighs those limited circumstances that could be unfair to some. That is why Oregon waits to se how it plays out non washington and makes adjustments to the measure . . . kind of like they are doing with marijuana.
 
Treaty_of_Batum said:
I suppose one could interpret deliver as loan. I like the idea of not being able to just give a gun to someone else, but you bring up a good point on how the the measure could create situations that would be unduly harsh.

I'm still for the measure but would like to see it clarified for it not apply to those very limited situations. If not, I still think the measure as a whole outweighs those limited circumstances that could be unfair to some. That is why Oregon waits to se how it plays out non washington and makes adjustments to the measure . . . kind of like they are doing with marijuana.
Click to expand...

I'm against guns made out of marijuana.
 
Treaty_of_Batum said:
I suppose one could interpret deliver as loan. I like the idea of not being able to just give a gun to someone else, but you bring up a good point on how the the measure could create situations that would be unduly harsh.

I'm still for the measure but would like to see it clarified for it not apply to those very limited situations. If not, I still think the measure as a whole outweighs those limited circumstances that could be unfair to some. That is why Oregon waits to se how it plays out non washington and makes adjustments to the measure . . . kind of like they are doing with marijuana.
Click to expand...

The background check is fine. I just think they need to clarify it more for a gun owner to allow friends to use the firearm at a range. My gun dealer actually let's me to fire some of his guns to try them out. That way I can try out different manufacturers that best feel right for me.

Background check is fine. Just give people the right to let friends or customers fire them.
 
magnifier661 said:
The background check is fine. I just think they need to clarify it more for a gun owner to allow friends to use the firearm at a range. My gun dealer actually let's me to fire some of his guns to try them out. That way I can try out different manufacturers that best feel right for me.

Background check is fine. Just give people the right to let friends or customers fire them.
Click to expand...

That's fine. But should we stop people from giving their guns to whoever they want?
 
magnifier661 said:
I actually agree with that part of the control. Background check for any transfer of ownership. Absolutely!
Click to expand...

And I agree that the measure could be better worded to allow for the situations you are talking about.

Look at that gun control and right to firearms coming together to get something productive accomplished. We should team up in the legislature. :)
 
Treaty_of_Batum said:
And I agree that the measure could be better worded to allow for the situations you are talking about.

Look at that gun control and right to firearms coming together to get something productive accomplished. We should team up in the legislature. :)
Click to expand...

Hahaha :cheers:

I'm not a cheating lying bastard. I wouldn't do well in politics
 
magnifier661 said:
Yes I believe I am correct.

"(25) "Transfer" means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans."

If you loan out your gun, the person must go through a background check

http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you are absolutely not correct (but thank you for linking the text so that I can prove you wrong!).

Check Section 3, paragraph 4(f)(ii). It specifically exempts loaning your gun out at a firing range from the law.

(ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the
firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range
authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such
range is located;
Click to expand...

barfo
 
barfo said:
I'm afraid you are absolutely not correct (but thank you for linking the text so that I can prove you wrong!).

Check Section 3, paragraph 4(f)(ii). It specifically exempts loaning your gun out at a firing range from the law.



barfo
Click to expand...

Wrong... Read up and it is limited to only a spouse or domestic partner. Unless you think friends are your domestic partner... LOL!

The temporary transfer of a firearm (i) between spouses or domestic partners; (ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located; (iii) if the temporary transfer occurs and the transferee's possession of the firearm is exclusively at a lawful organized competition involving the use of a firearm, or while participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized group that uses firearms as a part of the performance; (iv) to a person who is under eighteen years of age for lawful hunting, sporting, or educational purposes while under the direct supervision and control of a responsible adult who is not prohibited from possessing firearms;
Click to expand...
 
magnifier661 said:
Wrong... Read up and it is limited to only a spouse or domestic partner. Unless you think friends are your domestic partner... LOL!
Click to expand...

Those are separate, independent exceptions. (i) Spouse OR (ii) gun range OR (iii) shooting competition OR (iv) to a minor for hunting.

Barfo's right (damnit).
 
magnifier661 said:
I actually agree with that part of the control. Background check for any transfer of ownership. Absolutely!
Click to expand...

Must spread rep!! I appreciate gun owners that can see what I feel are common sense situations. I don't really have a big problem with general public owning guns, though it does make me uncomfortable personally. But I do have a problem when people start selling guns to others or "lending" guns to friends without a background check. Everyone agrees, they don't want guns in the hands of criminals.
 
Eastoff said:
Must spread rep!! I appreciate gun owners that can see what I feel are common sense situations. I don't really have a big problem with general public owning guns, though it does make me uncomfortable personally. But I do have a problem when people start selling guns to others or "lending" guns to friends without a background check. Everyone agrees, they don't want guns in the hands of criminals.
Click to expand...

I don't mind waiting 11 days for my guns. It's fine with me. I am up in arms about silly gun restrictions in California. But that's entirely a different subject.
 
Eastoff said:
So do you now support the bill? Despite none of us in the conversation living in Washington.
Click to expand...

I must read the entire bill to make judgement, but it seems no different than what I'm used to in California. I had no idea that people in Oregon and Washington can sell a gun without registration. That's pretty crazy actually! Haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
Politics Oregon Supreme Court OKs ballot title for gun storage initiative
2 3 4
Replies
119
Views
5K
riverman
riverman
magnifier661
POOR HILLARY
3 4 5
Replies
124
Views
4K
Denny Crane
Denny Crane
SlyPokerDog
Zombie Paul Allen sure ain't no Phil Knight
Replies
6
Views
986
beast blazer
beast blazer
santeesioux
Paul Allen ready to pull the trigger on bringing NHL to Portland?
Replies
16
Views
1K
santeesioux
santeesioux
magnifier661
Politics Ted Cruz's superPAC gives $500k to Carly's campaign
Replies
2
Views
485
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94
B

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top