Mises: Brief History of Repressive Regimes and Their Gun Laws

From the Mises Institute comes the article A Brief History of Repressive Regimes and Their Gun Laws

Arguably one of the rights that has seen less government encroachment in the US — in contrast to other activities such as commerce — gun rights are now witnessing unprecedented attacks at the state level and even from politically-connected corporate entities.

Although gun control laws are not created equally in terms of overall impact, gun confiscation holds a special place in the halls of political repression. A trip down memory lane will give us a refresher of how gun confiscation has helped consolidate government power.

The Soviet Union and Its Satellite States

The Soviet Union left its mark as one of the deadliest political regimes in the history of mankind. However, it could not get away with such atrocities without having a complete monopoly on the use of force…

Although the numbers are highly disputed, Robert Conquest contends in his book The Great Terror that at least 15 million people perished under Soviet rule.

Nazi Germany

These days the word Nazi is tossed around liberally, almost rendering its definition meaningless. Regardless, the history of Nazi Germany should never be forgotten. Interestingly, both sides of the gun debate make mistakes when discussing gun control policy in Nazi Germany…

…Gun control may not have a path dependency toward tyranny. However, gun confiscation is an egregious form of gun control that allows authoritarians to steamroll their subjects at will. The way gun confiscation enhances the consolidation of state power is undeniable. A disarmed populace is simply no match for a repressive apparatus that has a monopoly on the use of force.

Gun rights might not guarantee victory against tyrants, but being deprived of them all but guarantees submission.

Click here to ready the entire article at Mises.org.

Judge’s Unconstitutional Effort to Block Blueprints for 3D-Printed Guns

In news directly related to the recent announcement of a federal settlement with Defense Distributed, a Seattle federal judge has issued a restraining order to prevent Defense Distributed from posting the blueprint files.  From National Review:

If there’s a hall of fame for futile, symbolic, and ultimately unconstitutional federal court orders, the temporary restraining order just issued in Seattle blocking Defense Distributed and the Second Amendment Foundation from posting blueprints for 3D-printed guns deserves at least a plaque, if not a full display. The court’s order temporarily overturns a Trump administration legal settlement that reversed an Obama-era policy designed mainly to limit the spread of the relevant files abroad, not here at home. I love NPR’s sardonic Twitter response:

NPR gets it. Let’s be clear about what has just happened. A federal court has issued a prior restraint on speech (it’s attempting to block the spread of information; it is not blocking the lawful home manufacture of firearms) that is already thoroughly and completely moot. The files are out. They’re all over the internet. They’ve been copied and reproduced. The judge’s order can’t change that fact.

Moreover, Defense Distributed and the Second Amendment Foundation are hardly the only sources for online files or blueprints that enable a home manufacturer with a 3D printer to make a gun. I’m honestly unclear what the court is trying to accomplish here, aside from targeting the Trump administration and/or targeting a disfavored private company.

Earlier today I published a lengthy explainer of the factual and legal issues surrounding the 3D-printed gun controversy. I’d urge you to read the whole thing, but the bottom line is easy to understand. First, home manufacture of weapons is clearly lawful, and it has been common practice in the United States since before the founding of the nation. Second, it is thus just as lawful to “print” a gun as it is to assemble one with parts in your garage. Third, the plans to print guns are widely-available on the internet — and have been for some time.

Put another way, a gun that’s lawful to assemble is lawful to print. A gun that’s unlawful to assemble is unlawful to print, and that includes undetectable plastic guns that are either printed or assembled. It’s that simple.There is no new “threat” here. There is no crisis…

The files at issue can still be downloaded from http://codeisfreespeech.com/

Tonight, the organizations and individuals behind CodeIsFreeSpeech.com, a new Web site for the publication and sharing of firearm-related speech, including machine code, have issued the following statement:

Our Constitution’s First Amendment secures the right of all people to engage in truthful speech, including by sharing information contained in books, paintings, and files. Indeed, freedom of speech is a bedrock principle of our United States and a cornerstone of our democratic Republic. Through CodeIsFreeSpeech.com, we intend to encourage people to consider new and different aspects of our nation’s marketplace of ideas – even if some government officials disagree with our views or dislike our content – because information is code, code is free speech, and free speech is freedom.

Should any tyrants wish to chill or infringe the rights of the People, we would welcome the opportunity to defend freedom whenever, wherever, and however necessary. Hand-waving and hyperbole are not compelling government interests and censorship is not proper tailoring under the law.

There is no doubt that Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed have inspired countless Americans to exercise their fundamental, individual rights, including through home gunsmithing. Through CodeIsFreeSpeech.com, we hope to promote the collection and dissemination of truthful, non-misleading speech, new and evolving ideas, and the advancement of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms…

9th Circuit Three-Judge Panel Upholds Right to Open Carry Firearms

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals determined, in Young v. State of Hawaii, that the Second Amendment protects “the right to carry a firearm openly.”

Truth About Guns reports,

The right to carry a firearm for law-abiding citizens barely exists in Hawaii. A so-called may-issue state, the Pacific paradise hasn’t issued a permit to carry this century. As far as the fiftieth state is concerned, Americans only have a right to keep and bear arms in their own homes.

That violation of his Second Amendment rights (see District of Columbia v Heller) was the basis for George Young’s suit against the state. Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a two-to-one decision, agreed with Mr. Young.

A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protects a right to openly carry a gun in public for self-defense, rejecting a claim by Hawaii officials that the right only applies to guns kept at home. …

Two of the three 9th Circuit judges voted to reverse a decision by the U.S. District Court in Hawaii that state officials did not infringe on the rights of George Young, the plaintiff, in twice denying him a permit to carry a gun outside.

“We do not take lightly the problem of gun violence,” Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain wrote in Tuesday’s ruling. “But, for better or for worse, the Second Amendment does protect a right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.”

You can read the full ruling here. The majority opinion wasn’t friendly to concealed carry, but here’s the main takeaway:

The panel acknowledged that while the concealed carry of firearms categorically falls outside Second Amendment protection, see Peruta v. County of San Diego, 824 F.3d 919, 939 (2016) (en banc), it was satisfied that the Second Amendment encompasses a right to carry a firearm openly in public for self-defense. Analyzing the text of the Second Amendment and reviewing the relevant history, including founding-era treatises and nineteenth century case law, the panel stated that it was unpersuaded by the County’s and the State’s argument that the Second Amendment only has force within the home. The panel stated that once identified as an individual right focused on self-defense, the right to bear arms must guarantee some right to self-defense in public. The panel held that because Hawaii law restricted plaintiff in exercising the right to carry a firearm openly, it burdened conduct protected by the Second Amendment.

In determining the appropriate level of scrutiny to apply to section 134-9, the panel first held that the right to carry a firearm openly for self-defense falls within the core of the Second Amendment. The panel stated that restricting open carry to those whose job entails protecting life or property necessarily restricts open carry to a small and insulated subset of law-abiding citizens. The panel reasoned that the typical, law-abiding citizen in the State of Hawaii was entirely foreclosed from exercising the core Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense. The panel concluded that Hawaii’s limitation on the open carry of firearms to those “engaged in the protection of life and property” violated the core of the Second Amendment and was void under any level of scrutiny.

 

 

Digital Firearm Files Allowed Online in Gov’t Settlement

The good legal news keeps coming in. Cody Wilson, founder of Defense Distributed, reached a settlement with the US Government recently with the government agreeing that Wilson’s online publishing of design files which enable home 3-D printers to print firearms is protected by the First and Second Amendments. The linked article from Wired is a bit biased against firearms, but informative.

Five years ago, 25-year-old radical libertarian Cody Wilson stood on a remote central Texas gun range and pulled the trigger on the world’s first fully 3-D-printed gun. When, to his relief, his plastic invention fired a .380-caliber bullet into a berm of dirt without jamming or exploding in his hands, he drove back to Austin and uploaded the blueprints for the pistol to his website, Defcad.com.

He’d launched the site months earlier along with an anarchist video manifesto, declaring that gun control would never be the same in an era when anyone can download and print their own firearm with a few clicks. In the days after that first test-firing, his gun was downloaded more than 100,000 times. Wilson made the decision to go all in on the project, dropping out of law school at the University of Texas, as if to confirm his belief that technology supersedes law.

The law caught up. Less than a week later, Wilson received a letter from the US State Department demanding that he take down his printable-gun blueprints or face prosecution for violating federal export controls. Under an obscure set of US regulations known as the International Trade in Arms Regulations (ITAR), Wilson was accused of exporting weapons without a license, just as if he’d shipped his plastic gun to Mexico rather than put a digital version of it on the internet. He took Defcad.com offline, but his lawyer warned him that he still potentially faced millions of dollars in fines and years in prison simply for having made the file available to overseas downloaders for a few days. “I thought my life was over,” Wilson says.

Instead, Wilson has spent the last years on an unlikely project for an anarchist: Not simply defying or skirting the law but taking it to court and changing it. In doing so, he has now not only defeated a legal threat to his own highly controversial gunsmithing project. He may have also unlocked a new era of digital DIY gunmaking that further undermines gun control across the United States and the world—another step toward Wilson’s imagined future where anyone can make a deadly weapon at home with no government oversight.

Two months ago, the Department of Justice quietly offered Wilson a settlement to end a lawsuit he and a group of co-plaintiffs have pursued since 2015 against the United States government. Wilson and his team of lawyers focused their legal argument on a free speech claim: They pointed out that by forbidding Wilson from posting his 3-D-printable data, the State Department was not only violating his right to bear arms but his right to freely share information. By blurring the line between a gun and a digital file, Wilson had also successfully blurred the lines between the Second Amendment and the First.

“If code is speech, the constitutional contradictions are evident,” Wilson explained to WIRED when he first launched the lawsuit in 2015. “So what if this code is a gun?”

The Department of Justice’s surprising settlement, confirmed in court documents earlier this month, essentially surrenders to that argument. It promises to change the export control rules surrounding any firearm below .50 caliber—with a few exceptions like fully automatic weapons and rare gun designs that use caseless ammunition—and move their regulation to the Commerce Department, which won’t try to police technical data about the guns posted on the public internet. In the meantime, it gives Wilson a unique license to publish data about those weapons anywhere he chooses.

“I consider it a truly grand thing,” Wilson says. “It will be an irrevocable part of political life that guns are downloadable, and we helped to do that.”

Olympia Gun Rights Rallies, April 14th and 21st, 2018

Two rallies are planed in Olympia to support Second Amendment rights.

The first is organized by The National Constitutional Coalition of Patriotic Americans and will be help Saturday, April 14th from 5:30 pm – 8:30 pm on the capitol steps. Contrary to the graphic below which shows 11:00 am, a competing event moved the WA rally to 5:30 pm. You can visit their site on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/162140641170312/

The second rally will be held on April 21st from 12:00pm – 3:00pm also at the capitol. Visit their page on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/events/1661802327190025/

Speakers for this rally include:

Organizer/ MC: Tessa Ashley
Opening Prayer: Chief Ben Charles, Lower Elwha Tribe
***National Anthem: Kerry French
***Pledge of Allegiance: Aryeh Rohde
***Seattle Pink Pistol- Sharyn Hinchcliffe
***Robert J Sutherland- 39th District Candidate
***Marty McClendon (Former Lt. Gov. Candidate)
***Jered Gavin- 05 District Candidate
***Elizabeth Scott- 39th Senator Candidate
*** Rep. Jim Walsh – 19th district
***Tiffany De Leon- Libertarian State Vice Chair
***Joey Gibson- US Senate Candidate
***Tyler Miller- Initiative 1621 Secure Safe Schools
***Naomi Davis- 26th District Candidate
*** Aryeh Rohde- Highschool Student that led a counter protest for “March For Our Lives” @ S.Whidbey Island H.S
***Allen Acosta- Libertarians MC/ Gun Rights Coalition
***Isa Cline- Long Beach City Councilman
***Kyle Paskewitz- Founder of Family Court Reform Nation
***Randy Vanaddisson- Former Air Marshall

Republicans Are Anti-Second Amendment, Too.

Karl Denninger at Market-Ticker.org has an article up titled Trump’s Gun Control (And Other Broken Promises): PA, but it’s really about Republican politicians at all levels voting against your right to protect your own life.

…The common rubric from the NRA and others is that one must vote “Red” lest the gun-grabbers get in power and do their thing.  Uh, no — the last 20+ years says exactly the opposite.  Even a Democrat majority in all three locations of the Federal Government was unable to do anything destructive to gun rights during Obama’s first two years.

Yet a Republican majority in all three houses plus in Florida has been extremely destructive in a matter of weeks and it was a Republican governor that signed that bill in Florida along with a Republican House and Senate that passed it.

It gets worse.  The Trump ATF is doing the exact opposite of honoring the Second Amendment.  In fact they and Trump literally just ripped up the entire Constitution including the 5th Amendment. Right here, right now.

Contemplate the entire “bump stock” thing folks.  These were sold as legal accessories for years.  Millions of dollars changed hands for them, people were employed and now they’re in the hands of individuals.  A formal legal ruling was issued by the BATFE that these were legal accessories; the manufacturers and buyers didn’t assume, they asked for and obtained a written declaration that these devices not only complied with the law they didn’t require any sort of labeling, serialization or other form of control (such as a background check) as legally they were nothing more than piece of plastic.

The government is, of course, entitled to be wrong and repair that error which is what they’re claiming they’re doing now.  What it’s not entitled to do, however, is turn you into a felon if you don’t destroy or turn over a thing you were explicitly told, in writing, was legal and nothing more-nefarious or subject to regulation than a plastic box.  At absolute minimum the government is required (under the 5th Amendment) to pay you for the current fair market value of that device plus all your costs (e.g. sales tax) associated with same and to pay the manufacturers the imputed value of their facility, inventory and forward foregone earnings (and employee salaries) that would have been generated but for their error.  They could also ban the things on a forward basis (limiting any 5th Amendment claim of “taking” to the manufacturers) and leave alone anyone who already owns one.

Instead they claim to be able to retroactively declare anyone who has one of these a felon and then shoot them if they refuse to either turn them over or report to prison for 10 years after having given written confirmation that the device in question is lawful to own, possess, use and sell without any permit whatsoever...

Read the entire article by clicking here.

WA Gun Owners Action League Update, Mar. 9th, 2018

From the Washington Gun Owners Action League:

Legislative Update from Olympia 9 March 2018

SINE DIE

48 GUN BILLS FILED IN 2017-2018 BIENNIUM

GOV SIGNS BUMP STOCK BAN

2519, 5553 AND 6298 TO GOV

PHOTOS ON CPLS?

MISSED ONE – AMMO BAN

WHY ONLY FOUR BILLS PASSED

INITIATIVE

LAST GOAL POST OF 2018 — HOPEFULLY

It’s over!The fat lady has done her part and has waddled off the stage,
and our legislators are packing up and heading home from Olympia.At this
point there is no talk of the need for a special session, unlike the
three special sessions we had last year..

The 2017-2018 biennium set a record for the number of gun related bills
filed: 48, 25 anti-, 20 pro- and three neutral.But as foretold in the
Book of Matthew, “Many are called but few are chosen.”Only four of the
48 managed to make it to the governor’s desk:None of the pro-gun bills
made the cut in the Democrat-dominated legislature, surprise,
surprise.HB 2519 and SBs 5553, 5992 and 6248 were the chosen few.SB
6620, the last minute “assault weapon” bill, failed to get a vote on the
last day of the session (given the time allowed, it was unlikely to pass
the House anyway).

On Tuesday, 7 March, Governor Inslee signed SB 5992, the “bump stock”
ban.In its final version, it only applied specifically to bump stocks
and not to other “trigger devices,” and allows for a one-year buy-back
period to be set up by the Washington State Patrol.Your reward for
complying with the law is $150.(As far as I can tell, nothing prevents
you from shipping or selling them out of state, as long as the
transaction occurs out-of-state).

HB 2519and SBs 5553 and 6298 sit on the governor’s desk awaiting his
action.He has three options: sign the bill(s) as is, section veto
portions he doesn’t like allowing the remainder to become law, or let it
sit without his signature, at which point it will become law.Unlike the
president, Washington has no provision for a “pocket veto” (no
signature) to kill a bill.I expect the governor to sign all three bills,
as he did SB 5992.

As I reported earlier, HB 2519 was amended in the House to allow issue
of CPLs to current and former military members aged 18-20.That amendment
was pulled by the Senate Law & Justice committee.The conference
committee also amended the final version of the bill added language that
allows the issuing authority to require a photograph be submitted with
the application, and that photograph to be embossed on the license.This
was discussed by the Department of Licensing more than ten years ago but
never implemented.It is solely up to the issuing authority to require
it.Some states have photo CPLs, other do not.

It appears in my rush to head for Las Vegas in January for the annual
Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trades show, I missed an anti-gun bill
filed.HB 2805 (Rep. Pollet, D-46) would ban the sale of exposed lead
projectile ammunition to those 18-20 years old.Concerns about lead
poisoning among the young, according to the bill language.Maybe Chicago
should consider such a bill.

Given the fact that for the first time in several years Democrats
control both the House and Senate as well as the governor’s mansion, why
so few anti-gun bills passed?One or two pro-gun Democrats in each
chamber helped us, and 2018 is mid-term election year.Had they passed a
slew of anti-gun bills, they likely would have lost perhaps several
rural-area legislative seats in November.Expect them to come back in
January, 2019 with blood in their eyes for gun owners.

By failing to address the “assault weapon” issue, it opens the door for
an initiative later this year that is likely to go well beyond simple
registration and/or age limits.And as we’ve been hearing from Florida
over the past week, where the Republican-majority legislature just
raised the age to buy long guns to 21 AND imposed a three-day waiting
period because of the Parkland school shooting, there are far too many
gun owners out there who don’t like “black rifles.”Or as we call them,
Elmer Fudds, “As long as they don’t come after my wabbit gun, I don’t
care what they do about other guns.”

Continue reading “WA Gun Owners Action League Update, Mar. 9th, 2018”

Washington: Hearing Scheduled for Legislation to Ban Long Gun Purchases by Law-Abiding Adults

From the NRA-ILA and the Gun Owners’ Action League:

Tomorrow, February 27th at 8:30AM, the Washington state Senate Ways & Means Committee is scheduled to hear Senate Bill 6620, which includes provisions that would raise the minimum age to purchase many common semi-automatic rifles and shotguns to 21 years of age and would also establish a 10 day waiting period.  In addition, anti-gun legislators in Olympia also submitted House Bill 3004 on February 24th, a companion to SB 6620.  This comes just two weeks before the end of the current legislative session, as they rush to accomplish their agenda.

NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters are strongly encouraged to attend the committee hearing tomorrow morning to voice their opposition.  Also, please use the “Take Action” button below to contact Senate committee members as well as your state Senator and Representative and urge them to remove all anti-gun provisions in SB 6620 and HB 3004!  Click the “Take Action” button below to contact senate committee members and your state Senator and Representative.

Senate Bill 6620, sponsored by Senator David Frockt (D-46), and House Bill 3004, sponsored by Representative Laurie Jinkins (D-27), would raise the minimum purchasing age for semi-automatic rifles and shotguns in the State of Washington from 18 to 21 years of age based on cosmetic features.  Federal law already prohibits adults under the age of 21 from purchasing a handgun from a licensed firearm dealer.  Legislative proposals to prevent law-abiding adults aged 18-20 years old from acquiring modern semi-automatic rifles or shotguns would deny them access to the most modern and effective rifles for self-defense, thus depriving them of their constitutional rights.

This legislation attempts to brand these firearms as having “tactical features” to drum up unnecessary fear of their ownership.  In reality, these firearms are only being defined by aesthetic features that in no way affect the functionality of the rifle.  Semi-automatic firearms only fire one shot per action of the trigger, and such technology has been available to American consumers for over a century.  Semi-automatic firearms are commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for various purposes such as self-defense, recreation, competition, and hunting.

SB 6620 and HB 3004 would also establish what amounts to a 10-day waiting period for transfers of these firearms by requiring that they go through the state background check like handguns rather than the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that is currently used for all long gun transactions.  While federal law allows for such transactions to be completed if three days have elapsed from the time of the “delayed” response, the state check requires a wait of ten days in such a scenario.

We need serious proposals to prevent violent criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from acquiring firearms.  Passing a law such as this punishes law-abiding citizens for the evil acts of criminals.  The NRA supports efforts to prevent those who are a danger to themselves or others from getting access to firearms.  At the same time, we will continue to oppose gun control measures that only serve to punish law-abiding citizens.  These are not mutually exclusive or unachievable goals.

Again, please contact Senate committee members and your Senator and Representative urging them to remove all anti-gun provisions in these bills!

From GOAL of WA

GOAL Alert 2018-2
Legislative alert from Olympia 25 February 2018

HOUSE COUNTERPART TO SB 6620

ACTION NEEDED, NOW!

I’d say I’m sorry for the rush of messages, but I’m not. The rush is caused by end-of-session manipulation by Democrat “leadership” in Olympia, and calls for a strong response.

As I have posted frequently, it ain’t over ’til the fat lady sings. And she’s not scheduled to sing until midnight on 8 March (a week from this coming Thursday). While the legislature sets cut-off dates and other procedural processes to keep bills moving and cull out other bills, the bottom line is that these are not written in the state Constitution, they are internal rules adopted by the legislature and may be changed by the legislature at will.

The House has filed a “counterpart bill”, HB 3004, to SB 6620. A counterpart bill is a verbatim duplicate of the bill filed in the other chamber. If both pass unamended, it/they go straight to the governor for his signature.

SB 6620/HB 3004 is a 14 section, 28 page bill in their words, “Improving security in schools and the safety of our students.” What it is is a Trojan horse, gun control hidden under the guise of the standard Democrat mantra “It’s for the children.”

Part I of the bill is a single section less than one page in length and talks about unspecified funding for “school emergency response systems.” Part II, “Students protecting students,” is three more sections spread over 10 pages and discusses nominally establishes a program whereby students may – anonymously if so desired – report potential threats to school safety and sets out procedures, including court action, to be followed, as well as identity protection for all involved in the process up to and including law enforcement and court personnel.

Part III is the zinger, “Semiautomatic rifles or shotguns with tactical features.” 18 pages, 24 sections describing the offending firearms as semi-auto rifles or shotguns with detachable magazines (mostly the features such as pistol grip, thumbhole stock, flash hider, grenade launcher – the standard litany of evil features from the federal 1994 Clinton/Feinstein “assault weapon ban”). There are some omissions here but I’m not going to identify them. Please note that these definitions do not include tube-fed firearms or manually operated firearms.

The principal focus in Part III is shifting “semiautomatic rifles and shotguns” to the same category as that applied to handguns: they can only be sold to individuals age 21 and over, and are subject to the additional requirements for handguns: additional state paperwork and waiting periods (with the existing CPL exemption).

Keep in mind, under I-594 ALL firearm transfers must be processed by a licensed dealer, meaning that de facto registration already exists via the FFL’s required record-keeping, but this would effectively add offending semi-auto firearms to the state pistol registry, creating an on-line data base of such firearms.

It also increases the state firearm dealers license fee from $125 to $150.

Text of SB 6620: http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6620.pdf

Text of HB 3004 has not been posted yet, but the bill’s home page is at: http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=3004&Chamber=House&Year=2017:

It is the intention of legislative “leadership” to ram this bill through before the end of the session. How much time will be given to public testimony remains to be seen – at this point no public hearings are scheduled.

It is imperative that you contact your legislators as soon as possible to ask that they remove Part III from the bill. Parts I and II are likely legitimate, but Part III is strictly a ploy to use school and children’s safety as a cover for more gun control.

You can find your legislators by visiting: http://app.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder

Once you find your district, simply scroll down to see your Senator and Representatives listed. Click on their name and it will take you to their information, including a link to e-mail them.

Or you can call the Legislative Hotline tollfree at (800) 562-6000.

We need to flood the legislature with you going on record opposing Part III of SB 6620/HB 3004.

This is just step one on their agenda. There is already discussion of raising the age limit for the purchase of ALL firearms to age 21. The Bill of Rights does not impose an age limit on the exercise of fundamental, enumerated (listed) constitutional rights. Not to mention the fact that you can enlist in the military, or be drafted, and fight for your country at age 18.

If anyone receiving this is attending the WAC gun show in Puyallup today, please make copies of this and take them to the show. Thank you/.

Second Amendment Rally in Olympia, Friday, Jan. 12, 2018

Rally 4 UR Rights will be held on the Capitol steps in Olympia on Friday, January 12th, 2018 from 9:00 am until noon. Washington State arms rights activists are rallying to oppose a slew of gun control bills which Democrats, who now hold the majority in both the state House and Senate, hope to pass.

Very important this year, set aside January 12th. We are going to Olympia to Rally for Our Rights again. This year it is very important as we no longer have the safety net of a state senate to stop anything bad for us. As we do each year we are rallying to our representatives. We will have a short rally at 9:00 AM to discuss the current issues regarding our right to keep and bear arms. Following this all attendees are asked to get to your representatives to meet and discuss the issues with them. This is imperative this year as they need to know our right to keep and bear arms must be protected. We will have a team there to both help you find your reps and to help you write letters to them as well. In the past these have been quite successful. Those attending were able to get to many of their representatives to meet and speak with them. Let’s do this again folks and see if we can get 1000 people there this year. We know it is a weekday so please do whatever is necessary to get that day free. It is more important than ever this year.

Please note: We would like to ask anyone that carries firearms to please keep them holstered or slung. Each of us is responsible for our own actions. That includes both appropriate safety and conducting ourselves in a respectful manner that will reflect positively on the group as a whole. Thanks and can’t wait to see you all there.

Washington State Capitol
416 Sid Snyder Ave SW, Olympia, Washington 98504