Editorial by Lynn Stuter
Posted 10/24/2014
Back when I-594 first came out, I requested that the sponsors site me …
• one instance when a background check has stopped a criminal from stealing a gun?
• one instance when a background check has stopped a criminal from shooting someone with a stolen gun?
After a great deal of beating around the bush, rabbit-trailing, hemming and hawing, the sponsors never were able to provide the requested information.
The fact is that I-594 …
• will not stop one criminal from stealing a gun;
• will not stop one criminal from shooting someone with a stolen gun;
• will not stop one criminal from obtaining a gun on the black market.
In fact, I-594 makes absolutely no reference to any of these situations in which criminals are most likely to be in possession of a gun.
In the same vein, I-594 sponsors have provided not one shred of proof that anyone has been killed, injured, or shot with a gun obtained at a gun show or a gun purchased from a private party.
The bottom line, here, is that laws are made for the law-abiding.
As such, I-594 is intended to take the rights of the law-abiding; it won’t stop one criminal intent on harming someone with a gun.
I-594 would not have stopped Charles Wallace, the convicted felon who, in June 2012, shot two Spokane County Deputies with a gun stolen from a Utah Highway Patrol Trooper in September of 2011.
The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility has sent out a flier titled “An Election Guide for Responsible Gun Owners.” The flier insinuates that responsible gun owners will vote “yes” on I-594 and “no” on I-591.
The truth is exactly the opposite, for reasons given above. Responsible gun owners will vote “no” on I-594 and “yes” on I-591.
The prime contributors to I-594 are Nicolas Hanauer, Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, Bill and Melinda Gates and Paul Allen.
Everytown for Gun Safety is Michael Bloomburg’s outfit. Here is a snapshot of the advisory board:
Ask yourself this – why is it that people who can afford to hire armed security want you, who cannot afford armed security, to be defenseless against the criminal element?
And ask yourself why out of state interests have their noses stuck in the business of the people of Washington State?
And ask yourself why these people are being allowed to buy an election in Washington State?
Lynn Stuter
Washington Resident