Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > us.talk.constitution > #130

Sneak Attack on Washington State

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Did you know the Winchester 1903, a .22-caliber rifle that has a 
10-round tube magazine, is a “semi-automatic assault rifle”? In 
fact, every semi-automatic rifle is a “semi-automatic assault 
rifle.” So says Michael Bloomberg, and he is poised to turn his 
definition into law.

 The gun-banner epithet “assault weapon” has always been a 
deceit. Unlike other firearm terms—such as “handgun” or “bolt 
action”—the phrase “assault weapon” has never had a fixed 
meaning. Instead, the phrase is a euphemism for “as many 
firearms as we can restrict, based on current political 
conditions.” Back in 1989, then-Sen. Dennis DeConcini, D-Ariz., 
introduced an “assault weapons” bill to ban only nine specific 
models of firearms. But that was what the prohibitionists call 
“a good first step.” Now, Bloomberg and his allies are pushing 
an “assault rifle” ballot initiative in Washington state that 
would apply to every semi-automatic rifle in existence.

Bloomberg and his spokespeople claim to support the Second 
Amendment, saying they simply oppose “assault weapons.” But then 
they try to classify any semi-automatic rifle as an “assault 
weapon,” regardless of caliber, magazine capacity or anything 
else.

Gun-banners in nations such as Australia and Great Britain have 
already succeeded in outlawing all semi-automatic long guns. In 
the United States, a big step in that direction is this year’s 
Washington state ballot measure 1639.

Bloomberg and his spokespeople claim to support the Second 
Amendment, saying they simply oppose “assault weapons.” But then 
they try to classify any semi-automatic rifle as an “assault 
weapon,” regardless of caliber, magazine capacity or anything 
else. Under Bloomberg’s proposed Washington law, semi-automatic 
rifles or handguns of any type would be subjected to onerous new 
restrictions and taxes, thus discouraging their possession and 
lawful use.

One objective of the Bloomberg strategy is stigmatization of gun 
owners. Maybe you just bought a Benelli R1, or your father gave 
you his Ruger 10/22, or you cherish your great-grandfather’s 
Remington 8. You, like all owners of semi-automatic rifles, are 
being stigmatized as an “assault rifle” owner—the kind of person 
who owns “weapons of war” that have no place in civil society.

This spring, Bloomberg organized rallies all over the country to 
denounce people who own such “assault rifles.” The hatred was 
palpable. Most of the people at those rallies knew almost 
nothing about firearms, and Bloomberg’s employees worked hard to 
make them loathe you because you own a “semi-automatic assault 
rifle.”

The Washington state scheme provides context to Bloomberg’s 
propaganda campaign, which employs boycotts, threats, libel and 
mob hysteria against anyone having anything to do with what they 
consider “assault rifles.”

Perhaps you thought that the hate groups were only talking about 
AR-15s, Mini-14s or other firearms invented in the past six 
decades. To the contrary—every semi-automatic rifle ever made, 
going all the way back to the first Winchester in 1903, is an 
“assault rifle,” according to Bloomberg. The kind of people who 
hunt with them, collect them, sell them or make them are evil 
people who worship guns and don’t care about children’s lives. 
So say the mobs chanting the Bloomberg slogans. If the 
Washington proposal passes in November, individuals who wish to 
acquire a semi-automatic rifle will also have to waive the 
confidentiality of their medical records. The act of applying to 
purchase “shall constitute a waiver of confidentiality and 
written request that the health care authority, mental health 
institutions, and other health care facilities release, to an 
inquiring court or law enforcement agency, information relevant 
to the applicant’s eligibility to purchase.”

The Bloomberg groups pushing the defamatory initiative call 
themselves “Safe Schools Safe Communities” and the “Alliance for 
Gun Responsibility.” That’s like a group that wants to restrict 
access to books calling itself the “Alliance for Literacy.” The 
groups are funded by not only Bloomberg, but also by his 
billionaire allies, including former Microsoft Corp. executive 
Paul Allen.

Under the Bloomberg proposal, nobody, of any age, could ever 
acquire a “semi-automatic assault rifle” (that is, any semi-
automatic rifle) without first passing a gun safety course, the 
content of which would be controlled by the government. So if, 
for example, you have been a certified hunter-safety instructor 
for the last 25 years, that still isn’t good enough. You can’t 
even borrow a semi-automatic rifle without first enrolling in 
and passing the government-controlled class at least every five 
years.

Further, no semi-automatic rifle sales or loans will be allowed 
without prior permission from the local police chief or sheriff. 
In Washington, such permission has historically been required 
for handguns, but not for long guns. If background check records 
are incomplete, local officials can place a 30-day hold on the 
sale, and that hold can be renewed indefinitely by a court. 
There is no specific requirement that the person subject to the 
hold be notified or have an opportunity to present his or her 
side of the case to the judge.

Under current law, those visiting Washington can purchase long 
guns. But the Bloomberg initiative would forbid them from 
purchasing semi-automatic rifles.

Also under the Bloomberg initiative, law enforcement would be 
required to keep detailed registration records, including the 
serial number, make and model of every semi-automatic rifle that 
is sold or lent with their authorization, as well as information 
about the buyer.

As experience demonstrates, registration records collected in 
one year can then be used for confiscation in future years. 
That’s precisely what occurred in Australia, whose gun control 
scheme is often touted by gun prohibition lobbies as the model 
we should be following. The national gun confiscation law in 
Australia was introduced shortly after the Australian anti-gun 
lobbies had succeeded in imposing gun registration in all 
Australian states.

Think it can’t happen in the United States? The same already has 
occurred in New York City. Long-gun registration there was 
enacted in 1967. Later, starting with Mayor David Dinkins and 
continuing ever since, the city’s gun registration lists have 
been employed for gun confiscation. When Bloomberg was mayor, he 
oversaw the confiscation of all long guns that held more than 
five rounds—a list which included semi-automatics, as well as 
those with pump actions and other actions.

If the Washington proposal passes in November, individuals who 
wish to acquire a semi-automatic rifle will also have to waive 
the confidentiality of their medical records. The act of 
applying to purchase “shall constitute a waiver of 
confidentiality and written request that the health care 
authority, mental health institutions, and other health care 
facilities release, to an inquiring court or law enforcement 
agency, information relevant to the applicant’s eligibility to 
purchase.”

Handgun and semi-automatic rifle owners would be subject to 
continuing reverification of their eligibility to possess 
firearms. According to the initiative, the verification must 
take place “on an annual or more frequent basis.” So at least 
once a year—and possibly many more times, according to the 
language of the initiative—the government could harvest and 
store the medical records of owners of handguns and semi-
automatic rifles.  To the contrary—every semi-automatic rifle 
ever made, going all the way back to the first Winchester in 
1903, is an “assault rifle,” according to Bloomberg.

Suppose you promptly get permission from the local police or 
sheriff to purchase a handgun or semi-automatic rifle. You still 
can’t take the gun home: There will be a minimum waiting period 
of 10 business days (that is, at least two full weeks, depending 
on holidays) before you are allowed to take possession of your 
gun. It’s too bad if you’re a stalking victim in need of 
immediate protection, or if you’re a hunter who wants to replace 
a gun that broke in the middle of a hunting trip.

If you’re under 21, you might have to wait a lot longer, as 
Bloomberg is committed to eradicating the Second Amendment 
rights of young adults. His initiative would prohibit 
individuals 18 to 20 years of age from acquiring a semi-
automatic rifle.

Bloomberg’s prohibitory rationale could also be applied to many 
other groups. For instance, males commit homicide at a much 
higher rate than do females, but that does not justify a gun ban 
for all males.

The preamble to the Bloomberg initiative says, “Research 
indicates that the brain does not fully mature until a later 
age.” The current scientific view is that full development of 
the prefrontal cortex is not completed until about the age of 
25. So while Bloomberg currently aims to disarm 18- to 20-year-
olds, his initiative actually sets the stage for limiting gun 
ownership to those over 25.

Under Bloomberg’s proposed plan, every semi-automatic rifle 
transfer would incur a $25 tax. This includes lending a semi-
automatic to your brother-in-law for a weekend hunting trip. 
When your brother-in-law returns the rifle to you, there’s 
another $25 tax. Worse, this tax is indexed to inflation, 
meaning it would automatically increase as the inflation rate 
does.

The proceeds from this tax must then be used to administer the 
gun control program—for example, hiring employees to collect all 
new medical records about those who own handguns or semi-
automatic rifles.

Of course, gun stores can’t provide services for free. When they 
conduct private transfers, as is now required in Washington 
state under a 2014 Bloomberg initiative, they charge fees for 
the time required to fill out all the paperwork. Consequently, 
the simple act of lending a firearm to a relative for the 
weekend and then having that firearm returned could easily cost 
$100 or more in taxes and fees.

Under ballot measure 1639, gun stores would also be ordered to 
disseminate false anti-gun propaganda to firearm buyers. The 
language on an application form to buy a handgun or a semi-
automatic rifle would state: “Caution: The presence of a firearm 
in the home has been associated with an increased risk of death 
to self and others, including an increased risk of suicide, 
death during domestic violence incidents, and unintentional 
deaths to children and others.”

It is true that in the homes of law-abiding citizens, firearms 
do increase “the risk of death … to others.” Namely, it is the 
risk of death to home invaders, stalkers and other violent 
criminals.

Social science studies do show that when a violent domestic 
abuser has access to a gun, the abuser is more likely to kill 
someone. But domestic abusers—even those who have been convicted 
of just a misdemeanor—are already prohibited from possessing a 
firearm. That has been federal law for more than two decades. 
The studies also show that in the home of a domestic violence 
victim, such as a woman who has escaped from an abuser, the 
presence of a firearm is not associated with criminal homicide.

Under current Washington law, the application form for a handgun 
purchase includes the notification “that local laws and 
ordinances on firearms are pre-empted by state law and must be 
consistent with state law.” This accurately informs gun owners 
about their legal rights. The Bloomberg initiative would 
eliminate that notification requirement. Of course, preventing 
gun owners from knowing their legal rights is a key strategy of 
the Bloomberg organizations.  Under ballot measure 1639, gun 
stores would also be ordered to disseminate false anti-gun 
propaganda to firearm buyers.

Because of the extremism of ballot measure 1639, Bloomberg’s 
team has even illegally concealed the contents of the initiative 
from petition signers. In violation of Washington state law, the 
paid petition-gatherers did not allow signers to see the full 
text of the initiative, including the provision that would 
remove current language in state law. Even the website for 
Bloomberg’s “Alliance for Gun Responsibility”—proponents of the 
measure—refuses to post the full text of the initiative. 
Instead, website visitors are merely offered an incomplete and 
deceptive summary of the initiative.

There is no doubt that Bloomberg and other malefactors of great 
wealth will spend massively to fool Washington voters about 
what’s really in the measure. And it is doubtful that most of 
the media will do a good job of fully informing the public.

Yet it’s possible to beat the 11th-richest man in the world if 
enough grassroots civil rights activists work hard to educate 
the public, including their friends and neighbors. In 2016, for 
example, the voters of Maine narrowly rejected a Bloomberg 
ballot measure.

Ultimately, the side with the most money does not always win 
elections. The entire financial resources of the NRA are a 
pittance compared to Bloomberg’s personal wealth of $50 billion, 
let alone the cumulative wealth of Bloomberg’s network among the 
ultra-rich. Yet the NRA uses its limited resources effectively. 
If the NRA has what it needs to get the job done, it’s possible 
that Bloomberg could be defeated in Washington.

If not, then expect copies of the Washington law to be 
introduced all over the country, just as Bloomberg’s previous 
victories in the far West have been used as models elsewhere.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20180901/sneak-attack-on-
washington-state
  

Back to us.talk.constitution | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Sneak Attack on Washington State "Gene Poole" <gp@dont-email.me> - 2018-09-15 03:02 +0200

csiph-web