Bloomberg Supported Initiative 1639 Threatens Second Amendment

Washington – -( In all the fight over the United States Senate, governorships, and control over the United States House of Representatives, there is another threat that has been looming under the radar. That threat is I-1639 in Washington state. Given the realities of the political landscape in that state, this measure is likely to pass.

The initiative is not an outright ban on semi-automatic rifles, like that called for by Dianne Feinstein, but it is very nasty. This 30-page initiative made it on the ballot thanks to some blatant judicial activism by the state supreme court. That activism was aided by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who has actively supported I-1639 rather than maintain neutrality, as has been the tradition in that state.

This entry was posted in Gun Control, Liberals, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Bloomberg Supported Initiative 1639 Threatens Second Amendment

  1. bogsidebunny says:

    The Progressive tide abetted by Communist University academics insures the 2nd will be repealed within 50 years. I don’t wish it, but I’m a realist and I can see the demographic shift. Under 40s brainwashed to believe a gun-free country will guarantee no killings will be in control very soon.

  2. rick says:

    When arguing for preservation of the 2A to persons who care little of the 2A or hold the idea that ‘guns are bad’, the battle is lost.

    Instead, the argument must be, Which of your rights are you willing to give up?
    We must tie the 2A to all other rights. It must be seen that the 2A is as important as every other right. Further, it must be shown that the 2A is the hinge upon which all other rights hang.

    The tens of millions spent to limit or eliminate the 2A can be defeated by speaking in a civil tone armed with a few facts (not too many as it will overload the listener) to every one you meet about the importance of the 2A and why it is so important. Tailor your conversation to the time allowed and the type of individual.

    To say the 2A is to prevent the govt from harming the individual is too abstract. Most people have no knowledge of a government gone wild. The argument must be personalized and to a point which the listener can fathom. Even the actions of the Koreans during the LA riots is too abstract to most people because they can say they are not Korean, don’t live in a big city, or what ever excuse they think.

    • singlestack says:

      The problem is that very few people know the difference between a right and a privilege, and believe that government can grant or take away rights.

      • singlestack says:

        Should read…and most people believe that government can grant or take away rights.

  3. sarthurk says:

    HTF cares? They’re not taking ’em until after I’m dead.

    • warhorse says:

      yeah, but what about your kids? or other people’s kids? that’s how they get what they want..incrementalism. a little here, a little there, stuff that doesn’t do anything to you right now but down the line it gives them the control they want.

      we think in elections. they think in generations and sometimes multiple generations.

  4. oak says:

    After the election and found out this thing passed I asked my grandson who graduated high school a couple of years ago and asked him if they taught them about history in regards to communism and socialism and how many millions of people were killed under those systems and his response was that he did not remember being taught any of that except a little bit about fighting the communists in the Soviet Union. That is why all these kids don’t care is because the schools did not teach them what happens to a society when only the government has guns and wishes to force its will on the people who do not want to live under that system or protest against it. They think socialism is facebook.

  5. CaFarmer says:

    Well….. at least it wasn’t California leading the way for once…

  6. Sanders says:

    “If you try to take our guns, we’ll kill you.” – Mike Vanderboegh

  7. Greg says:

    If they are on the fence but leaning hard toward individualism, then yes, talk about ‘rights’ with those around you. Otherwise, you are wasting your time. Learn about r/K gene selection (molyneux explains it best) and youll learn that biology/nature has already decided the issue.
    Incrimentalism is checkmate, better off forcing the issue while we have a chance.

Leave a Reply to bogsidebunny Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *