State Senate panel flexes muscle, blocks gun control bills
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - A Senate committee led by firearm-friendly lawmakers blocked five gun control bills Friday, suggesting that this year's momentum related to weapons laws may not be enough to win passage.
Members of the Law and Justice Committee voted to reject a variety of proposals, including one that would have created a task force to study weapon violence and another that would have created a specific crime for people who leave out loaded guns for children to access. Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, expressed frustration after the hearing, saying the majority on the committee was stuck in "mindless, rigid refusal" that rejects even common sense ideas.
"They are in such rigid refusal, they just can't see it," Kline said.
Kline said he suspected that if the Connecticut school massacre hadn't happened recently, his proposal related to child access to guns would have passed unanimously.
Sen. Mike Padden, R-Spokane Valley, chairs the committee and decided not to hold public hearings on many of the gun proposals. Democrats moved to take votes on the measures ahead of Friday's deadline for policy bills, and Padden argued that the bills should be rejected because they didn't have a proper public debate.
"We haven't had a hearing to hear both sides on this," Padden said on Democratic Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles' proposal on child access to guns.
Kohl-Welles noted that her bill had 24 sponsors in the Senate, including two Republicans and Senate Majority Leader Rodney Tom.
The state House is working on a plan to expand background checks, with the help of a Republican lawmaker who works as a police officer, providing perhaps the best hope for gun control supporters who have worked on such a bill for years. Padden said he wasn't sure whether that bill would get a hearing in his committee.
Sen. Pam Roach, a Republican lawmaker on the Law and Justice Committee, had spoken positively about the first bill considered - a plan that would allow law enforcement agencies to store weapons if people voluntarily surrender them for a period of time. But when it came time to vote, Roach paused before casting the deciding vote to reject the bill.
Roach then left the committee room for the remainder of the votes, leaving the bills to die on 3-3 ties. Roach did not immediately return a call seeking comment after the hearing.
Members of the Law and Justice Committee voted to reject a variety of proposals, including one that would have created a task force to study weapon violence and another that would have created a specific crime for people who leave out loaded guns for children to access. Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, expressed frustration after the hearing, saying the majority on the committee was stuck in "mindless, rigid refusal" that rejects even common sense ideas.
"They are in such rigid refusal, they just can't see it," Kline said.
Kline said he suspected that if the Connecticut school massacre hadn't happened recently, his proposal related to child access to guns would have passed unanimously.
Sen. Mike Padden, R-Spokane Valley, chairs the committee and decided not to hold public hearings on many of the gun proposals. Democrats moved to take votes on the measures ahead of Friday's deadline for policy bills, and Padden argued that the bills should be rejected because they didn't have a proper public debate.
"We haven't had a hearing to hear both sides on this," Padden said on Democratic Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles' proposal on child access to guns.
Kohl-Welles noted that her bill had 24 sponsors in the Senate, including two Republicans and Senate Majority Leader Rodney Tom.
The state House is working on a plan to expand background checks, with the help of a Republican lawmaker who works as a police officer, providing perhaps the best hope for gun control supporters who have worked on such a bill for years. Padden said he wasn't sure whether that bill would get a hearing in his committee.
Sen. Pam Roach, a Republican lawmaker on the Law and Justice Committee, had spoken positively about the first bill considered - a plan that would allow law enforcement agencies to store weapons if people voluntarily surrender them for a period of time. But when it came time to vote, Roach paused before casting the deciding vote to reject the bill.
Roach then left the committee room for the remainder of the votes, leaving the bills to die on 3-3 ties. Roach did not immediately return a call seeking comment after the hearing.
You wouldn't be able to tell if it was spray painted across computer screen. For starters one of the problems is so widely accepted by all, even Sen. Cantwell acknowledges it enough to have an aide include an entire paragraph on Mental Illness in responses to letters about gun control. But the main problem is something that you seem to be even more oblivious to than I originally thought. CRIMINALS buy their guns out of car trunks in back alleys, trade drugs for them in the street or get them in the back room in a house from a guy name Bob. Your "better laws" are nothing but More of the Same failed laws that ignore the fact that these are the guns and people that are involved in the incidents. More of the Same laws that ignore the fact that if someone is determined to break the grand daddy of all laws and commit Murder... they won't be to concerned when obtaining their gun ILLEGALLY. More of Same laws that fail to understand a psychopath will pass your 'training' with flying colors and patiently wait a whole year to kill the people on their list. More of Same laws that focus on the people who are not the problem in the incidents and only make it "Harder" for those who only wish to protect themselves and families from the ONLY people not effected by these laws. The Criminals and Crazies that appreciate fools like you who abet their evil deeds with laws like "Gun Free Zones". Allowing them the peace of mind, that when they pass by that sign, they know there will be nobody who can stop them ... just like what happened in Mass. But the biggest of all problems and responsible countless deaths is you and people like you. Those sinister enough to dupe others into thinking More of the Same irrational, backward thinking laws have already failed is a solution and necessary action. The same laws that were doomed from the start because they only targeted the citizens who didn't create any of the statistics. Even worse, refusing to address the people committing the murders whatsoever: the gangs and circles of criminal who are killing each other everyday in the streets and the wackos who commit public shootings and mass killings. I'm certain they appreciate your support.
Kline is a coward. He refuses to respond when called out on his support of unconstitutional bills (see the unedited HB5737), claims an "oversight" in his vetting of the bill, then is quick to complain when his shenanigans get blocked.
Maybe if people in his district would smarten up, they'd vote in someone who cares about their rights instead of looking to take them away (and in this case I'm not referring to the 2nd, but the 4th which he was happy to trounce.)
Fantastic news.
Tomi Davidson: "Upset with Fox News. They didn't say anything, about the Day of Resistance Rallies across the country. Heard there were around 50,000 people that participated. Which could have been a much higher number if people would stand up for their rights. Laziness is a disease even with conservatives."
Bad
@Miller Wa Â
WHAT is bad?
I don't feel picked on at all! LOL. I did do a report on the 2ND amendment back in college. I defended a conservative point of view even though I tend to be slightly to the left. When my views changed with times changing and my own maturity, I have not resorted to name calling or being rude to conservatives. I just understand that it is not a given right for individuals to own military assault weapons that have been used in mass shootings whether in a theater or a school.
@Deb RobinsYou sound reasonable Deb therefore I suggest you study SCOTUS case US vs Miller (1939). If you dig deep enough into the opinion of the court you'll find you are wrong. The court defined what a militia was in 1786, and what the founders intended when they wrote the 2nd amendment. Specifically the founders intended the 2nd amendment to defend (not create) the peoples God given right to own the same weapons an average foot solder would be issued by the government. In 1939 this upheld the Gun Control Act of 1934. But if taken to the extremes today the decision would allow: Today an average foot solder is issued an assault rifle and light machine guns, and therefore the 1934 law is no longer Constitutional. Notice I didn't say "assault weapon" because there is no such thing in the firearms industry nor in firearms history and knowledgeable gun people have no idea what you are referring to. I'm no lawyer, and this is only my understanding of the Miller case, but it's pretty clear.
ca has a law that says we have to have a safe for weapons if little kids are present,,i agree
With all the "gun control" talk I haven't heard one politician say how they would make anything harder for criminals,Â
Just the targeting  the law-abiding American People. Almost everything they propose (99%) directly focuses on  honest, hard working, lawful Americans, while seemingly advocating for the criminals like the mass shooters that at one time forced  us to begin this most recent wave of reactionary, flailing. Lunacy that would be very successful ... if the goal was making it harder or impossible to defend ourselves and families against the criminals they have decided to instead empowered with each bass-awkard law imposed on the innocent who would make it harder for this "extremist" to choice to avoid being a victim that is gaining followers. Gun-nuts are weird, being a victim is the way to go. Â
So what is the "real" problem? Reading your rant I cannot tell.
With that "logic" we could decrease drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to by cars? How does ignoring criminals and psychopaths (the problem) and instead focusing your "better laws" on honest, hard working, law abiding Americans (not the problem) "ultimately protect every citizen"? Forget "every" ... How is A SINGLE citizen being protected by Ignoring the Real Problem? How could they be termed "better gun laws" when they do Nothing to address the issue in the slightest way? By not addressing the problem and instead pretending to - by making it "harder" for citizens to protect themselves from the problem being ignored - is only giving citizens a false sense of safety when they have, instead, been made less safe. It is this lie that is more dangerous than anything, because now since they feel action has been taken, nothing will be done to ever address the source of the problem as well as the source of deadly consequences for not doing so, ignored by your "better laws". How much self-deception is required to accept the canard it "benefits the whole" to not even begin to touch on a solution that would alter the actions of one lone criminal (people that shoot other people) while simultaneously making it "Harder" for the rest of us to defend ourselves and our families against the criminals who you seem to be an advocate for? There is likely nobody who is a greater threat to the safety of the citizens as a whole and no one more dangerous than you and people like you.
'A really bad word I cAnt use in this forum.' ;) Watch the typos
Lol, well if he said so ... Certainly not any ideologues around that campus. That is the sad thing right here, Deb and many others (not only picking on Deb here) who 'lean left' have not and will not read what is maybe the most influential and significant collection of writings ever assembled. Basically refuse to read our founding documents and related works authored by the same great men. Instead the source of their ignorant, usually nonsensical and always vociferous contributions to the discussion are based on .... reading an article someone wrote in The New Yorker about someone else who read the Constitution? That IS sad. Mainly for the fact that this is not a complicated read, by any means, whatsoever. Certainly possible without 'interpretation' by some Prog Professor. Inasmuch, an academic introvert, on the other hand, IS necessary for a good misinterpretation of these uncomplicated and routinely despised documents.
No "they" don't get the consequences, innocent children do.
http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/02/5193-gun-rights-anti-gun-people-can-not-defeat-this-video/
@HeisenbergÂ
I love that lineup. Piers is a snide stooge that needs to be sent back across the pond.
This really surprises me, considering it's Washington State.
@Valerie Maclean Â
Please expand up on your statement.
A good rant on gun control efforts by "liberals".
http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/the-post-in-which-i-piss-off-everybody
I voted for these cowards? Were you in the voting booth with me?
It could be worse. Apparently Oregon fascists are even worse than our own home-grown ones like Kline:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/13reg/measpdf/hb3200.dir/hb3200.intro.pdf
But if violating both the 2nd and 4th Amendments might save one life, it is worth it. Next, look to see a state-wide registration system for everyone seeing a mental health professional.
@IconoclastÂ
The scary thing about Kline is he would be chair of Law and Justice committee if it wasn't for the 2 Dems crossing over (Sheldon, Tom) to make the Majority COALITION Caucus. Oh, and Ed Murray, cosponsor of SB 5737, he would have been Majority Leader.Â
@G HÂ Kline was chairman in the past. Fortunately he is a jerk and an incompetent so he rarely succeeds at getting any of his bills passed.
@Iconoclast They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Anyone comes knocking on my door saying the have the State Law saying they can search without a warrant will get a door shut in their face and a copy of the Bill of Rights. Oh, and a lawsuit.
@Iconoclast So Kline is a fascist for suggesting stiffer penalties for adults who leave their guns out unsecured and wind up in the hands of kids? Â
Is that what you're going with? Disgusting.Â
@lakeview Wearing the usual blinders regarding the 4th Amendment violation that Kline has repeatedly proposed? Yearly inspections of firearm owner's homes without a warrant?
So do you plan on supporting Kline when he proposes "modifications" to the 5th Amendment? Leftists already want to modify the 1st Amendment to punish "hate speech" (defined, of course, by the always benevolent bureaucrats in government). Adding the 4th and 5th Amendments is just a natural progression.
@lakeview @Iconoclast Hmmm. I wonder how you felt when obama renewed the patriot act and expanded it? I'm pretty sure you are all in a twitter over Bush but anything obama does is just A OK even if its the same as Bush and even more. Yea you have credibility, not.
@Getov Mylon That Bush. He hid his evil genius behind his apparent stupidity. Even 5 years later Obama is dancing to Bush's tune.
But, really, the one topic has nothing to do with gun control. Separate debates.Â
Nice subject change....but ANYTHING that diminishes the liberties noted in the Constitution and Bill of Rights is cause for alarm....regardless of the party affiliation of the diminisher.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2011/05/201152715850301322.html
Love that source!
Apparently, "lakeview" is now a Rand Paul supporter?
"Congress bumped up against the deadline mainly because of the stubborn resistance from a single senator, Republican freshman Rand Paul, who saw the act's terrorist-hunting powers as an abuse of privacy rights."
@lakeview @Iconoclast Well, I agree for once with  LV. I am glad President Obama didn't renew the Patriot Act because... wait... just in...
Obama DID renew the Patriot Act!  Oh my, if Obama renewed it, then it must be Bush's fault, I guess.Â
@lakeview Who cares what makes a creature like you sick? I certainly don't.
This discussion has nothing to do with wiretapping and your pathetic attempt to drag that into the debate merely shows your inability to defend your anti-civil rights position. Debate that elsewhere on its own merits, not as some sort of excuse for a race to the bottom.
@Iconoclast @lakeview I'm just looking for some consistency from the conservatives. I just get sick of people like you falling back on the Constitution in an effort to shame people like me. I wonder where all you guys were post 9/11 when we literally lost our Constitutional rights.Â
@lakeview Need to change the subject, I see. Well, running and hiding is a pretty good tactic when you have lost.
Wiretapping, interrogations, etc. are topics for another thread. Go there instead of attempting to drag this one off topic.
@Iconoclast @lakeview I'm just curious how you felt when Bush was illegally wiretapping Americans with the help of AT&T and other telecoms...or how about when his team of neocons gave us the wonderful Patriot Act that basically allows sneek and peek searches of our homes. Are you even aware that the feds can search your home now and you may never know it? Â
Let's put things in perspective shall we, maybe take off your blinders?
@lakeview, No, he was refering to that part of 5737 that got removed. You know, yearly inspections of your home by police? The third time Kline has tried this?
@lakeview @SargeMcC Ever hear of the Constitution?
@lakeview oops. Agreed that a letter to the editor is not sufficient. Here are the bills:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2005-06/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5475.pdf
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6396.pdf
Kline's lips are moving...he's lying.
@Iconoclast, Yes, but as a sheepdog you still need to defend the sheep. Even when they hate you.
@RN1Â lakeview is a liberal, which means slave-like submission to government and complete suspension of disbelief when it comes to leftist propaganda. Rather like much of the media (which came first, the jailer or the prisoner?)
@lakeview@SargeMcCYou DO understand the difference between a private company person coming into one specific part of the house, usually the garage, and inspecting a small mechanical system to ensure proper functioning, not looking at anything else, and leaving, vs an officer of the law coming in for an inspection and looking around for anything at all they might deem in any way a problem with any government agency, right? If you don't, you are REALLY in need of some serious brain cell myelination.
@Iconoclast @lakeview He probably is, but a letter to the editor is hardly proof of anything.
@lakeview
http://mobile.seattletimes.com/story/today/2020397892/track-.-.-./
Kline is lying about the ignorance. He has submitted the same bill before.Â
@SargeMcC Geez, I have a yearly inspection in my home for my backflow valves...I guess I live in a fascist state. Â
I would like to see this language for inspections, because I am guessing it isn't what you claim.Â
If you want any meaningful gun control laws you'll have to start with a grassroots referendum movement. The establishment politicians will never do it.
by definition, almost anything can be an assault weapon...
Definition of ASSAULT 1 a: a violent physical or verbal attack b: a military attack usually involving direct combat with enemy forces c: a concerted effort (as to reach a goal or defeat an adversary) 2 a: a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact.........your argument is ridiculous because .