Armed demonstrators rally against gun control efforts
»Play Video
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - Supporters of gun rights in Washington state turned out in force Friday at the state Capitol, carrying guns and signs while decrying efforts to control firearms.
Jason Dupea of Tacoma, one of hundreds of people at the rally, suggested it would be better for lawmakers to eliminate "gun-free" zones or strengthen punishments for those who commit crimes with firearms.
Dupea said he's a longtime supporter of gun rights but only recently began joining rallies. He's optimistic that gun owners can block the restrictions being considered by lawmakers.
"I think there's more momentum with the people for their rights than there is with the government for legislation," Dupea said while carrying his M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle. "Eventually, the government has to capitulate to the will of the people."
State lawmakers have proposed a variety of ways to combat gun violence, including an expansion of background checks and allowing teachers to carry weapons.
Supporters of new restrictions are optimistic that some legislation can pass the Legislature this year as lawmakers respond to the mass killing at an elementary school in Connecticut.
Gun advocates argued that new restrictions on gun sales and magazine capacities would infringe on Second Amendment rights.
Many speakers at the rally Friday focused on President Barack Obama and federal efforts to control gun violence. Some shouted to impeach Obama and accused him of committing treason.
Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, encouraged people to make their voices heard and remain politically active to defend gun rights. She said afterward that she'd like to see the state focus on mental health issues and make sure people with mental problems are getting treatment.
"These are the ones who commit the crimes," Roach said. "We've done nothing but make it easier for people with mental health issues to walk among us, untreated, and get around firearms."
Roach said mentally ill people don't own firearms but get them from family members or steal them. She encouraged people to make sure their guns are stored with a lock.
Supporters of new gun restrictions have long pushed to background checks to cover all sales, including deals between private parties.
Ralph Fascitelli, president of Washington Ceasefire, said he was encouraged by support of the idea in the Legislature this year, including that of Republican Rep. Mike Hope, a police officer.
Jason Dupea of Tacoma, one of hundreds of people at the rally, suggested it would be better for lawmakers to eliminate "gun-free" zones or strengthen punishments for those who commit crimes with firearms.
Dupea said he's a longtime supporter of gun rights but only recently began joining rallies. He's optimistic that gun owners can block the restrictions being considered by lawmakers.
"I think there's more momentum with the people for their rights than there is with the government for legislation," Dupea said while carrying his M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle. "Eventually, the government has to capitulate to the will of the people."
State lawmakers have proposed a variety of ways to combat gun violence, including an expansion of background checks and allowing teachers to carry weapons.
Supporters of new restrictions are optimistic that some legislation can pass the Legislature this year as lawmakers respond to the mass killing at an elementary school in Connecticut.
Gun advocates argued that new restrictions on gun sales and magazine capacities would infringe on Second Amendment rights.
Many speakers at the rally Friday focused on President Barack Obama and federal efforts to control gun violence. Some shouted to impeach Obama and accused him of committing treason.
Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, encouraged people to make their voices heard and remain politically active to defend gun rights. She said afterward that she'd like to see the state focus on mental health issues and make sure people with mental problems are getting treatment.
"These are the ones who commit the crimes," Roach said. "We've done nothing but make it easier for people with mental health issues to walk among us, untreated, and get around firearms."
Roach said mentally ill people don't own firearms but get them from family members or steal them. She encouraged people to make sure their guns are stored with a lock.
Supporters of new gun restrictions have long pushed to background checks to cover all sales, including deals between private parties.
Ralph Fascitelli, president of Washington Ceasefire, said he was encouraged by support of the idea in the Legislature this year, including that of Republican Rep. Mike Hope, a police officer.
Open carry is a bad idea. It scares the patrons of a store away. It is bad for business for that store. If you saw someone open carry would it be OK with you? If you saw someone open carry into the Tacoma mall or maybe Clackamas mall or maybe Sandy Hook school would you be OK with that?
 @dmw2913 I've seen them, have no problem with them.  Can't say I recall any other patrons being scared away either.
@dmw2913 Yes I would be ok with that as long as they were being responsible and not waving it around which is against the law.
 @dmw2913 Anyone who carries openly and is not actually working as a police officer or as a licensed security guard is indeed scary and threatening because that act is essentially either making a false claim of authority or making an open threat. It is a behavior of very insecure individuals who feel the need of public affirmation and "respect" that they think carrying a gun gives them.
 @JLS1950  @dmw2913 Your hopolphobia is showing. But it is curable with education.
 @RN1  @dmw2913 The word is actually spelled "hoplophobia" - coined by Jeff Cooper- and meaning terror of tools. And no, I am not phobic of weapons themselves. I am phobic (perhaps) of nitwits who feel that having a gun automatically gives them a right to use it.
People like the fellow in Little Falls, MN, who surprised and shot two would-be burglars (justifiable on the face of it) without warning (now we have a problem) who were unarmed (much bigger problem) first killing one and minutes later severely wounding and disabling the other -Â and who then "put a handgun under the chin of wounded and gasping 18-year-old Haile Kifer for what he told police was a 'good clean finishing shot.'"
Or like the homeowner who shot and killed a kid (in his driveway) whose GPS device had led him to the wrong door to pick up his date.
Or like the homeowner who shot and killed a Japanese exchange student in his driveway who had showed up at his (wrong) door in costume for a Halloween party.Â
Or like the Dinh Bowman, who pulled up alongside Yancy Noll at a stoplight and shot him to death apparently as much as anything because he wanted to see what it would "feel like."
Or like my neighbor, who swung around while firing a rifle while at a "stray" cat (my daughter's) and ended up with his rifle pointed directly at my family on our own back deck. Never mind that it was an air rifle: I discovered pellet pocks in my siding and I have a broken tempered-glass window in a door.
It is not the weapons themselves that truly scare me: it is the people like so many posters in this debate who express that they "need" their guns to fight off the "government" - or insist that they have a "right" to shoot any unexpected person who so much as rings their doorbell - or assert that any shooting based on "fear" is justifiable even if they themselves have deliberately put themselves in that place of fear and still have an easy means of retreat from it.
The use of firearms against people should always be a LAST resort - and yet the comments of so many gun "defenders" here express a view that they are a FIRST response to any perceived "danger".
And THAT is what scares me half to death!
Translated:
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets wil be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
---Adolf Hitler-1935
Â
Wasn't long after that when Germany confiscated all guns. Is that what you want people?
Here is a much more "authoritative" quote (i.e. with much more accepted provenance) from that era:
âIf you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.â --Paul Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda, 1933 - 1945.
Â
Unfortunately, this also seems to be a false quotation and thus an example of precisely what it describes: scholars generally agree that Goebbels only made such statements as accusations about BRITISH "propaganda". However, it does at least seem to parallel a statement made by Hitler himself in this book, Mein Kampf:
âIn this they [the Jews] proceeded on the sound principle that the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds, they more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads, and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others.â¦â (p. 231 of the Manheim translation)
Â
But the truth apparently is that Hitler did not even make any significant public speeches in 1935 - nor was there any Nazi gun-control initiative or legislation during that year - and there is no actual record AT ALL that Hitler ever made THESE remarks on gun restriction AT ANY TIME! The closest that we are able to come to this sentiment from Hitler was a statement attributed to him by ONE source (the book Hitler's Table Talk, 1941-1944: Secret Conversations) as voiced sometime in 1942:
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police."
Â
Yet even this "quotation" seems questionable - being found only in one source published considerably after the fact. And the truth is that many people have been attributing quotations to Hitler and to other prominent public enemies to suit their own need for justification for a VERY long time!
You have been "punked".
Â
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1791/did-hitler-ban-gun-ownership
http://bytwerk.com/gpa/falsenaziquotations.htm
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/disarm.asp
 @JLS1950 And, of course, the propaganda you keep spewing is that gun control works to lower crime and murder rates, and the average law-abiding people will be safer if their access to effective tools of self-defense is curtailed. And yet, the evidence is all ambiguous at best, and mostly contrary.
@JLS1950 Ahh yes, the coward method. Don't stand up for yourself, just hide and wait for someone else to stand up for you.
 @RN1 Given the statistical fact that people are many times more likely to kill themselves, a loved one or a spouse with their firearms than ever to kill another in self defense...
Guns are NOT the only effective tools of self-defense: many more people save themselves and others with cell phones and locked doors and simple application of common sense than EVER do so with firearms.
 @Crimsonkid While I'm sure he thought that, IIRC that specific quote has never been verified. There are a lot of other good ones, though, that have been.
I have a CPL and I do carry, I don't open carry in respect for others who might be in fear of me. I admit open carry is legal but I would only do it if I was hunting. If someone was to open carry and a bad guy wanted your gun, he could just walk past you and hit you in the head with a pipe or some other object , or even stab you. You may be fast but if you don't see it comming, your gun is now his.
 @dmw2913 I've had a CWP for 30 years and thats also why I changed to a pocket gun. The bigger 9mm's are just too big and bulky and they don't stay hidden all the time. And makes people very uncomfortable when they spot the gun on you. I prefer that when I'm out that no one knows I'm carrying. Most all contact is going to be within 30 feet anyways so you don't really need a big gun. Even a 22 can work if you're a reasonably decent shot.
I open carry, I conceal carry, I do what I feel like depending on what i'm doing, I mind my own business, and I expect others to mind their own business. Really, it is that simple. If those that claim they feel unsafe, would just mind their own business, there really wouldn't be any issue, they're making it an issue, and it's totally lawful,
Â
now speaking of breaking laws and hurt feelings,  it hurts my feelings that so many of you speed on the highway, yet will you stop speeding to save my feelings? please think of me, next time you're ever in a hurry and remember I feel unsafe when you're speeding. (which is against the law)Â
SO TRUEÂ NUTZ2UÂ Â Â Â I HAVE A CPL AND NEVER SHOW OFF MY GUNÂ I CANTÂ STAND PUNKSÂ WHO WALK AROUNDÂ LIKE THESEÂ LOOSER;S SHOWINGÂ Â OFF THERE GUNS
 @SUN_RUNNER A poster child for the anti-constitutionalist movement.  Shouting, ill-informed, poor spelling and absent grammar, slathered in an ad hominem attack.  I'm betting you don't even own a weapon. Â
Â
American citizens were exercising their (see that Sun_Runner?) first amendment rights to support their second amendment rights.  If you don't like it, you don't have to attend.Â
This comment has been deleted
@SUN_RUNNER That just shows how much you don't know. My daughter is 24 years old 131 lbs 5 ft 9 in. tall and she carries a 45 auto and shoots better than a lot of men I know.
@sun_runner; Can't we just have a civilized conversation without you yelling at everybody? Jeesh...
You do realize that open carry in our state is completely legal? It's in the Constitution. That right has been upheld time and again by the Courts. That makes them PUNKS?
Â
Seems to me, if you were a real man, you'd open carry.
Â
Go sharpen yer crayons and come back later.
Â
.
Â
 @bobalouie real men do not walk around with guns becauase they are scared, or trying to show off how tough they are because they are insecure.
 @T H I S So police officers and American soldiers aren't real men (and women I guess).  Â
 @T H I S  @bobalouie The mailman just left your prescription of Viagra is there
 @SUN_RUNNER Sun... the caps lock button is on the extreme left of the keyboard <hint>
"Open-carriers," fundamentally, are cowards. They are so frightened by the society around them, and are so ill-equipped with the mental and verbal skills to peacefully defuse a confrontation, that their only recourse is to carry lethal force - "Ain't no one gonna mess with ME while I got mah gun strapped on heh heh hehâ¦". What a bunch of morons.
 @nutz2u You don't seem to grok a basic distinction, here. They are not, generally speaking, afraid of "the society around them." They quite reasonably the power of the government. HUGE difference. If you don't understand that, then your grasp of law and history is rather... minimal.
 @nutz2u D'oh! Typo! I meant to say "quite reasonably FEAR the power of the government"
 @RN1  @nutz2u RN1... I'm not meaning to poke fun at you here... but I just haveta know what "grok" was supposed to be
Â
 @RN1  @nutz2u thanks brother
 @TruthinAdverts  @nutz2u It's a term from a famous sci-fi book "Stranger in a strange land" by Robert Heinlein. It's about complete and total understanding of another. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok
@nutz2u, Obviously your ability to use diffusive verbal skills is lacking. Your offensive attack of people whom you know nothing about, other than they own guns, show a clear ignorance and intolerance that is not keeping with intelligent conversation. Crawl back under your bridge.
This comment has been deleted
 @gastoys  @nutz2u Don't feed the troll.
@gastoys First of all this not a civil rights issue. You have the second amendment so you have the right to bear arms-period.
The state has said carrying guns in parks is in the state constititution-settled.
This issue is about background checks and gun locks. The state has a right to to make that happen., ergo the 10th amendment.
If a state says you can't have a 40 round clip, that does not infringe on your 2nd right to bear arms. Look at the picture-looks like the 2nd is healthy.
The problem is that the only answer you gun avocates have to gun violence is more guns.
Arm the teachers-then who, the clergy, doctors in ERs, theater ushers, where will it end for you guys.
By the way, asked at least 20 times-who has actually used a weapon outside thier home to stop a crime? still waiting for the answer.Â
 @lexl1019  @snoopy84 Even police commonly use the term "clip". The correct analogy is that using the term "clip" instead of the more correct "magazine" is like referring to a fatal illness as "cancer" when the correct term would be "carcinoma" or "sarcoma" or "lymphoma"...
In other words, you are being an elitist snob, delivering argumentum ad hominem instead of addressing the meat of the issue.
@snoopy84:Â criminals and the insane are also the DV suspects.Â
Â
The armed ex-cop is now a teacher.
Â
The big bad wolf is a mythical creature written about in fairy tails. They are quite scarey, especially when hungry. I don't think they have the ability to reason though, so your brand of "protection" may not work, but try as you might...good luck.
Â
Just so you don't go away mad and in a huff, some of what I wrote was in jest - in case you didn't get that.
@jlynnhood "Most people killed by gun violence die at the hands of criminals or the mental insane. End of that discussion!"
No, a high number die in domestic violence.
As for arm ex-police I can see that not teachers.
Â
"And if the big bad wolf does come knocking on this fine countries front door and you need protecting, we'll protect you" Who is the big bad wolfe?
Just lock yourself in a room, throw a white flag our the window and we'll get to you when we can - and we won't even charge you - we might make you wash our clothes and dishes or something though, but I digress"
You more than digressed-you assumed!
Â
Â
I will protect my family and property just fine.
@lexl1019 If you have been taking notice of my comments for the past 2 months since this control issue came up, you would know I'm asupporter of the 2nd and gun owner.
My arguement is the fact that the 2nd is not in danger and that the NRA and gun avocates whom think they can stretch the second to carry where ever they please. The fact that some states offered those rights and some don't.
Arizona, where I'm from has always allowed open carry and in the early seventies I can remember bars that had signs "please check your gun at the door".
Some states have more strict gun laws.
The federal government has the right to ban assualt weapons if congress would approve that. I don't see it happening and don't see the good in it.
I also feel you guys and when I say "you guys" I mean those who keep up the hype up of a false notion of the 2nd being infringed upon. Also the notion that a park full armed citizens should make young mothers and thier kids feel safe. In most cases, mothers actually never feared going to parks.
My home is safe and no unwelcome person should try to enter.
My point of quoting Scallia is to validate my point the the 2nd has limitations.
Â
@snoopy84:Â Let's dissect your most recent post for a moment, shall we;
Â
I don't have a leader at the NRA as I don't belong to the NRA. While I appreciate a lot of what they do and agree with their general ideologies, I think some of their beliefs and tactics are a little too right-wing for me. That being said, I do support most of what they do.Â
Â
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good buy with a gun". Well, I would take any of my legally owned firearms, knives or cocobolo sticks to defend myself from a person with a gun over a stern tongue lashing.   The old saying, "the pen (or spoken word) is mightier than the sword" is just that, a saying. I prefer, "don't go to gun fight with a knife", or even better, "if you go to a gun fight, take all your guns, take all your friends and tell all your friends to bring all their guns". I know, they are just sayings, but they are cooler sayings.
Â
Why not arm teachers and janitors? Strictly voluntary and on their own dime and time, if they went through a handgun combatives class and did a yearly recertification class, heck yeah! There are a lot of ex-police, ex-military and sportsmen who are teachers. Let them have the honor of protecting our children!Â
Â
And yes, I do feel more safe in public when I'm armed. I feel sorry (not pity) for the person who comes to do me and my family harm. If they come into my house, or at me in public to do me harm, they shall pay a price.
Â
Background checks. Yep, I am all for background checks - even at the gun shows. Let's be honest, they are some real weird people at the gun shows. I am even for CCW's owners to go through some sort of private class to make sure the can even porperly handle, fire, carry and care for a gun. Why not? You have to take a test to get a driver's license, why take a test to conceal carry?
Â
The NRA's position is NOT that those killed by gun violence is an acceptable side effect of the 2nd Amendment. Not sure where you heard or read that, but that's plain crazy. Most people killed by gun violence die at the hands of criminals or the mental insane. End of that discussion!
Â
So, if you don't want to arm yourself, then don't - it is YOUR choice and I support that. However, don't get on your high-horse and tell me that I can't exercise my 2nd Amendment right becuase our courts won't hold most of our criminals feet to the fire when they do perpetrate violence on an innocent victim.Â
Â
And if the big bad wolf does come knocking on this fine countries front door and you need protecting, we'll protect you (after our families are looked after, course) because that's what we do, we're Americans and we take care of our own! Just lock yourself in a room, throw a white flag our the window and we'll get to you when we can - and we won't even charge you - we might make you wash our clothes and dishes or something though, but I digress.
 @snoopy84 "People like you"... what do you pretend to know about me?  I can't help but chuckle.  While you seem to be masterful at the art of argumentative deflection, you continue to ignore the same burden of proof you ask others for.  We are still waiting.
Â
Yes - like yours, mine is just an opinion. Â You seem fairly sure yours is correct too. Â Our little exchange here on KOMO will solve nothing, but at least it's mildly interesting.
Â
If law was as easy as "I'm right and you are wrong", we wouldn't need all those lawyers, now would we?
Â
Ignoring your deflection, my point of citing this case is instead related to Scallia declaring " the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid" as related to your earlier musings related to 10 round magazines.  Semi-automatic pistols are the most popular weapon by a wide margin.  Do you know why a Glock 17 has that name?  Because it holds 17 rounds, as most semi-automatic weapons hold more than 10 rounds.  In the past few months, millions of semi-automatic weapons have been flying off the shelves, demand easily exceeding supply by wide margin.  Each of these weapons come from the factory with as few as two magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, and most folks purchase many more.  I don't believe it's a logical chasm to jump that there are more magazines that hold 10 or more rounds than there are citizens in America.  Meet "the most popular weapon of choice."
Â
Enjoy your evening. Â I surely will. Â
Â
Â
@lexl1019 Okay, Â "magazines".
Â
As for Heller: Scallia's opinion on the 2nd. "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courtâs opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Millerâs holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those âin common use at the timeâ finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
Â
I'm sure Scallia is wrong and your right. Because anyone who has an opinion not in line with people like you are wrong.
Interesting you brought this case the case. Due to the fact it sent a strong message on the limitations of the second.
Shouldn't you guys be marching on the SCOTUS.
Â
 @snoopy84 "By the way, asked at least 20 times-who has actually used a weapon outside thier home to stop a crime?"
Â
Now that Jlynnhood has provided data, how about providing at least the same for crimes committed by those who obtain weapons via the "gun show loophole" nationwide, let alone in our own state? Â We'll be waiting.
Â
Calling them "clips" instead of magazines is akin to having a first grader explain how electricity works, then asking him to mandate related legislation.  Please familiarize yourself with the correct terms and go read some case law (Heller would be a good start, at a minimum). Â
When was the last time that our country used weapons of mass distruction...WW2 ring a bell, guess what we still have them and still making them. Oh, this is comparing apples to apples, We the People are of no lesser than the government if fact we are higher. The Second Amendment is for the People not the government and NO government or branch there of has the legal authority to Amend the US Constitution without a vote of the People.
@jlynnhood You have not been listening to your NRA leader?
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun"
Pushing to arm teachers, janitors. Avocating to be safe in public is to be armed.
Anti bcakground checks, anti federal gun owners data base, anti on closing gun show loop holes.
Many laws in place have been blocked by the NRA lobbyist by preventing the ATF to check audit gun sales.
So the NRA's position for those killed by gun violence is an acceptable side effect of the 2nd amendment.
@dmw2913 Let's compromise- you get a 10 round clip and I get 10 letter word max.
@snoopy84 If they passed a law saying you couldn't use words with more then three letters, would your 1st amendment rights be violated?
 @snoopy84 Also, your statement "The problem is that the only answer you gun avocates have to gun violence is more guns" is entirely false. Us "gun advocates" believe the laws, as they are now, need to be enforced better. Until the criminals who use guns in the comission of their crimes have the book thrown at them to the FULL extent of the law, this problem will not get any better. And, we need to have a better system in place to deal with the mentally ill.Â
 @snoopy84 http://www.examiner.com/article/media-blackout-oregon-mall-shooter-was-stopped-by-an-armed-citizen?fb_action_ids=3377922185659&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=246965925417366
Â
http://www.phillyburbs.com/my_town/willow_grove/armed-citizens-prevent-crimes/article_2eeb3757-c2cf-523c-a7b4-2eec056c30f7.html
Â
http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/stats.html
Â
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime
Â
Here are a few for you to peruse.Â
This comment has been deleted
 @the unvarnished truth  nutz2u must hold a black belt in Verbal Judo!Â
Gun-nuts' message to Washington State: support gun rights or we'll shoot you.
 @nutz2u Not sure where you saw that message, but it certainly wasn't from any legit gun owner who wishes to protect his/her 2nd Amendment right. Get a grip!