Marla's Gimme a Minute

I Only Need 60 Seconds!

Initiative 594 – Washington State

Hi I’m Marla. Gimme A Minute. I wanna talk to you about the Second Amendment.

I support the right of responsible citizens to own guns.

I hope you agree with me, that violent criminals and those considered to be a threat to society should NOT have access to guns.

The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility is a coalition of concerned citizens and organizations working together to forge commonsense solutions to reduce gun violence. Initiative 594 will require universal background checks for all gun sales in Washington State.

Yes, licensed dealers are required to conduct background checks on all sales.

But, there’s a loophole. Some Private sellers at gun shows and on the Internet sell guns with no background check and no questions asked.

Law enforcement agencies and public safety officials agree that this loophole promotes illegal gun trafficking, and enables individuals with criminal intent to purchase firearms. Currently, sixteen states and Washington, DC, go beyond federal law by requiring a background check for all private handgun sales. It’s shown that this legislation reduces Guns trafficked to other States, police killed with handguns, aggravated assaults, suicide, and women murdered by intimate partners.

Let’s make it harder for criminals in Washington State to get access to guns. Please vote Yes on Initiative 594 in November.

You have questions? Check out the website below, if you can’t find your answer there, ask me.

I’ll direct you to the right person. I’m Marla. Thanks for listening. See ya.


5 responses to “Initiative 594 – Washington State

  1. Randy Bragge September 17, 2014 at 2:09 pm

    Not only does I-594 require background checks for sales, it requires one for almost any transfer no matter how brief. While there are exceptions for spouses, family members, competitions/performances and those in danger, the initiative still goes too far. Allowing an unlicensed adult to whom I’m not related, to use one of my firearms for informal target shooting even while I supervise would be a crime, unless I store the gun at the shooting range at all times. This exception appears to be aimed at businesses that rent guns. The average gun owner will be treated like a criminal; 1st offense is a gross misdemeanor, 2nd a felony. There is an exception for a child, but not adults.

    There is an exception for transfers while hunting. While hunting probably doesn’t mean you can loan your rifle to a friend the day or week prior to the hunt. “While hunting” will probably be interpreted as “while in a Game Management Unit with a hunting license”.

    I’ve been exchanging e-mails with the WAGR for months. They are unwilling to answer my detailed questions regarding transfers and about who wrote the initiative.

    Randy Bragge
    (360) 440-5889

    • Marla B. September 22, 2014 at 11:06 pm

      Over the weekend, The Seattle Times looked at the opposition’s claims about transfers, and found they couldn’t cite a single case of responsible gun owners being harmed in other states that have closed the background check loophole. But #YesOn594 has plenty to cite supporting the effectiveness of common-sense background checks. Whether you ask police chiefs and law enforcement experts, prosecutors, or the FBI, the answer remains the same: there’s no truth to the misinformation from the gun lobby about transfers.

  2. Randy Bragge December 30, 2014 at 7:39 am

    Depends on what you mean by the word “harmed”. How does anyone benefit by making it a crime to allow a friend to shoot your gun at a rifle range or out in the woods without a bkgd check? Exactly what crimes are the WAGR trying to prevent in this case? As far as I know other states do not make it a crime to simply handle another person’s firearm like WA law now does. What about shippers like UPS? They are not exempt from the the requirement that all transfers “without limitation” obtain a bkgd check. I’ve written to UPS and their reply indicates they are going to ignore the bkgd check requirements. The police for the most part are ignoring I-594 and are loath to enforce it as shown by the rally held in Olympia where gun owners swapped guns back and forth in an open and obvious violation of the new law.

    I’ve been seeking answers from the WAGR for months, but they are not talking to me anymore.

    Never mind what the gun lobby is saying, what do you think about the other provisions of I-594 that extend far beyond gun sales and permanent transfers? Do you know the names of the person who actually wrote I-594? Any idea why they want to control the most brief transfer of a firearm including holding and examining one in a WA residence? You said you could provide an answer or show me who can. Hope you can live up to that promise. Thanks.

  3. Randy Bragge January 7, 2015 at 6:00 pm

    “You have questions? Check out the website below, if you can’t find your answer there, ask me.”
    I’m asking, why no answers?

  4. Randy Bragge February 18, 2015 at 7:21 pm

    Months go by and no answers. The WA AG has refused to provide any answers also.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: