Proposed Washington Law Shows Gun-Grabbers Intend to Have It Both Ways

Mixed signals and conflicting directions overwhelm and discourage citizens from going where they need to. That’s the point.

By David Codrea at Oath Keepers, December 21, 2017 •

“November’s special election will give Democrats control of both the state House and Senate for the first time since 2012 during the next legislative session,” Seattle’s My Northwest reported Tuesday. “November’s special election will give Democrats control of both the state House and Senate for the first time since 2012 during the next legislative session.”

That means they’ll renew their crusade for citizen disarmament.

Case in point, a “Restoration of Local Authority” bill being sponsored in the next legislative session by Democrat State Representative Nicole Macri will end 30 years of statewide preemption of firearms law, creating a patchwork quilt of changing edicts that will be difficult, if not impossible, for gun owners to navigate.  That’s the intent.

Think of the compliance confusion exemplified in the Shaneen Allen case, when a Pennsylvania woman with a concealed carry permit entered New Jersey with her gun – and almost had her life destroyed in the process. Now imagine similar situations arising from crossing invisible municipal lines.

And how presumptuous to claim authority they never legitimately had is being restored.

For all her high-sounding justifications arguing for the new bill, you’ll note Macri is not offering local autonomy for another bill she’s sponsoring, House Bill 1134, “AN ACT Relating to assault weapons and large capacity magazines” (English translation: Banning them).

Sorry, your town doesn’t get to opt out.

That’s typical hypocrisy. Barack Obama helped lay the groundwork for it when he was faking looking reasonable and claimed “I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne.”

What exactly works in Chicago was left unsaid. What Obama was doing was making the fraudulent case that states and local jurisdictions have the power to negate unalienable rights based on the tyranny of a regional majority.

Note that only goes one way, though. Whenever the gun-grabbers want to impose their will on others by restricting rights, the infringements cover everyone, in Everytown, regardless of whether they’re in Chicago or Cheyenne.

Or Seattle or Stevens County

Conversely, when widespread restrictions on rights are eased a bit, all of a sudden indignant “progressives” start screaming about “home rule.” No matter that a higher level of government has enacted protective legislation; all of a sudden it’s imperative for control freak enclaves to claim the power to ban guns in parks, to outlaw classifications of firearms they don’t want to let people own, and to forbid the practice of carrying, or transporting or transferring. They insist on having it both ways which means they insist on always having it their way.

When they say “home rule,” they mean to rule your home.


If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.

David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”

# # #

This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Bill of Rights, Learn Liberty, The Constitution and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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