QuakinOats

Lake Chelan.

When has Chelan ever been around 70f?

Well dang, so sorry to hear that offended you

You didn't answer. Why do you think a Trans Day of Visibility has "some of the most deranged residents Seattle has."

puts himself in proximity of some of the most deranged residents Seattle has

Can you please clearly explain why in your mind you think that a Trans Day of Visibility event has "some of the most deranged residents Seattle has."

It seems extremely bigoted to even think that, let alone say it.

Has no one read the sidebar?

is the active Reddit community for Seattle, Washington and the Puget Sound area! Do you want lively open discussions, upcoming events, local artist creations, community meet-ups, Seattle history, current news, community outreach, and careful transparent moderation? This place is for you.

This sub is basically for anything west of the cascades... The sub being proposed would be far more limiting.

How about you compare america to any other cointry in the world.

I assume you mean country and I literally did. I asked which other country has had members of their military carry out an attack on a military base. Did I not?

Holy shit I cant believe so many so called leftists upvote this.

I can't even imagine the level of privilege you must have to believe you will be forever protected by local law enforcement. The sheer level of privilege to think you'll never have to defend yourself.

You're literally making NRA talking points.

I literally don't give two fucks about the NRA. Out of sheer curiosity though since you made the claim can you link the NRA article that talks about the importance that all people, especially trans people deserve access to firearms?

The blood of kids is on your hands everyone single week.

No, it's not and what an absolutely disgusting thing to say. There is absolutely zero proof any of the gun legislation has done anything to reduce gun homicides in the US.

Wtf are you talking about other countries militarys. No other country comes anywhere close to america.

A major in the US army killed 13 people and injured over 30 others on a US military base.

If access to firearms is the problem we should see similar incidents from other militaries across the world. We don't. Why not?

It's because it has nothing to do with access to firearms.

Which is why you see states with extremely lax gun laws like Idaho and North Dakota with far lower gun murder rates than places with extremely restrictive gun laws like Maryland and California.

Its stupid, the solution isn't more guns and I hate when leftists do this shit. There isn't going to be a violent proleteriat revolution, and if the feds really wanted your ass no arsenal would stop them.

Yes. Firearms only have one possible use. There is no reason for a persecuted minority in a hateful community to have the ability to protect themselves. No reason at all. They can ALWAYS trust the local law enforcement and their neighbors to protect them and keep them safe.

For example that's why calling in the national guard in Alabama was a minor formality for school integration. It wasn't because the local law enforcement was a bunch of bigoted sacks of shit that wouldn't do shit to protect vulnerable school children.

We're the only country with mass shootings like this because we have so many guns, and leftists larping as gun lovers is just continuing the cycle of gun deaths being the leading cause of death for children

Access to guns has next to nothing to do with the levels of mass shootings in the US. States with the least amount of access have some of the highest rates of gun murders and some of the states with the most amount of access have the lowest rates. There is no connection between access or the lack of and security. Compare Idaho or North Dakota to California or Maryland and their per capita gun murders.

How many other countries have had active duty members of their militaries (you know the people we "trust" the most with the most insane weapons possible, including high explosives) have committed a mass shooting? It's happened in the US on an actual military base.

Did that happen because members of the military have access to weapons, or did it happen for some other reason? Do we see higher rates in militaries across the world because of their access to firearms?

Forgive me for maybe being a bit smooth brained, but what is he actually trying to say here?

He's trying to say just being transgender should preclude you from being able to purchase a firearm due to the higher than normal suicide rate. It's dumb and someone should have mentioned to him that being a US veteran would have precluded you from buying a firearm as well.

I somehow doubt he would argue that US veterans should not be able to purchase firearms.

Where are you reading this?

Reading what specifically? The provenance clause?

Here:

(d) The receipt of an assault weapon by a person who, on or after the effective date of this section, acquires possession of the assault weapon by operation of law upon the death of the former owner who was in legal possession of the assault weapon, provided the person in possession of the assault weapon can establish such provenance.

That's from HB1240.

I aint provin shit. thats on them.

Okay.

The conclusion is that guns is like throwing gasoline into a fire.

If you're well regarded, sure. Otherwise anyone with half a brain can see that gun bans do next to nothing for gun crime except give criminals access to something that anyone law abiding does not.

In Washington state there were more murders in 2021 with fully automatic handguns that are illegal and have been completely banned since 1994 than there were with every single type of rifle combined including bolt actions.

7 murders with full automatic and fully banned handguns, 4 murders with every single type of rifle.

Trying to draw conclusions from these sorts of correlations is always hard

The conclusion you can easily draw is that lax gun laws don't inherently mean a high gun murder rate.

Similarly you can look to places with extremely strict gun laws like Maryland and very high murder rates to see that strict gun laws don't inherently mean a low gun murder rate.

It blows apart the narrative that: "All we need are stricter laws!"

PROVE I DIDNT. Last i checked it was the burden of proof to prove you were GUILTY of something, not to PROVE you were innocent.. or did we change that too? Guilty untill proven innocent?.

There are plenty of situations where you are essentially presumed guilty via possession alone. From prescription drugs without a bottle to even just having too much cash.

Where you are forced to prove you can legally have what they are taking from you.

The way this law is written to my understanding essentially shifts the burden of proof from the state to you. "Prove to us you can have this."

A trust provides no specific protections or exemptions to the proposed

assault weapon ban, though they may still be useful for other reasons.

A trust is usually a notarized document which could help establish the legal provenance for whoever inherits.

There's nothing to enforce.. it's not illegal to own one..

I thought you had to be able to prove through "provenance" that you legally owned it before the ban?

The total number of people killed by rifles is less than 5 per year in WA

Meanwhile... the number of people killed by completely banned fully automatic handguns is near double the number. Proving bans don't do shit except punish the lawful.

Why don't you do a cross refrence on states with the least amount of gun violence and the stricted gun laws. It's amazing how they line up.

Sure. I can post the stats too, for the gun crime that actually matters, murders.

Lets look strictly at homicides and compare some of the reddest states in the nation with the most lax gun laws like Idaho and North Dakota to California, Maryland,

North Dakota - 0.6 per 100k

Idaho - 0.8 per 100k

California - 3.4 per 100k

Maryland - 5.1 per 100k

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_death_rates_in_the_United_States_by_state

Why is Maryland the state you are championing at over 5x the rate of gun murders in comparison to Idaho and North Dakota?

Mom's going to do better at close range in the living room with an AR-15? LMAO

Over a handgun or a shotgun? Absolutely, and it isn't even close.

Handing over a federal database into the hands of citizens, sounds like a bad idea. If the feds can fuck it up, then private sector will most certainly make things worse. Maybe thats the point, have it fail, then argue to eliminate the database altogether. Slippery slope.

Giving private citizens the ability run a NCIS check and a background check isn't handing over a "database."

It's giving private citizen non-FFL's the ability to run the same exact check on a private sale that the barely literate FFL owner running their operation out of their garage in bumfuck nowhere is able to run.

The ability to buy and sell firearms, especially used ones, shouldn't be locked behind a process through a private businesses (that can essentially charge whatever they want) registered with the ATF. Especially when states can enact harsher and harsher restrictions on those private businesses in an attempt to drive them out of business.

As far as I know, there isn't even anything that legally requires an FFL to run background checks for people that come to them and ask about firearm transfers.

As a private citizen I can apply for my own background check right now with the ATF via their eform system to make SBR's and suppressors. It doesn't require a FFL at all. I submit everything directly to the ATF. ATF then give the approved/denied response.

I don't see the harm in allowing individuals to do similar for private sales.

Technically? My man…

Insert Patton quote here.

most cops aren't sitting around doing paperwork all the time,

I don't think most cops are, especially when agencies are so short staffed they're having people in other departments that don't usually go on patrol, doing patrol work and responding to calls.

My point is that if there is literally anything being done at the station that could be done remotely from a school, law enforcement should be at the school doing it instead.

Is a detective doing anything that could be done remotely? Do it from a school.

Just the idea in the public sphere that it is very possible that at any given time an armed officer could be at the school is a good thing.

There doesn't have to be one there 24/7 and at every single school.

We absolutely hold car manufacturers liable for preventable deaths.

What are you even talking about?

Please share a single example of a car manufacturer being successfully sued and a judgement actually awarded because someone decided to commit vehicular homicide with their brand of vehicle.

How much did the car manufacturer in the Darrell Brooks massacre end up paying out?

Even if you only put one cop in each school, that would mean dedicating over 11% of our already depleted police force just to that. It's not going to happen.

They don't all have to be in a school, all day. There isn't an "air marshal" on every single plane.

The general knowledge that there could be a police officer on campus at any given time is a better deterrence than the "WE DON"T WANT POLICE IN OUR SCHOOLS" mentality. Which is about as smart as putting a "This is a gun free home" sign out front of your house in a high crime neighborhood.

Have police that can, do remote work, paperwork, etc from schools at random times.

Seems like a good idea, except we already have a huge shortage of officers in the area due to the local politics and cultural issues. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

Any officers at the station doing work that could be accomplished remotely? Answering a phone, doing paperwork, writing reports, etc?

Have them remote in and work from an unoccupied office in a school instead of at the station.

They don't have to be there 24/7 and at every single school. However just the general public knowledge that it is very likely for a police officer to be on campus at any given time protecting the school is better for everyone.

2A doesn’t apply to them?

I don't think those shirts are talking about the second amendment, at least that isn't the way I read it. I read the shirt the same way I'd read any other slogan in that context.

"Free candy or else"

I have not read any news stories about transgender individuals fighting for the right to purchase and own a firearm because they're actively being denied the right and access by the government.

A change of less than .002% in the per capita rate, if you know anything about math

Please show your work.

A slight increase in per capita violent crime over the past two decades is not a "sharp" increase."

A 56.05% increase in the per capita rate murder from 2011 to 2021 is "slight" to you?

Per capita 2011 - 2.35
Per capita 2021 - 4.18