A far left group calling itself Seattle Indivisible reminded everyone early Monday that this is the deadline for on-line voter registration in order to cast a ballot in the Nov. 6 midterm election, which is important to Washington State gun owners because they can vote on the gun control Initiative 1639.
So far, newspapers are divided on the issue. The Seattle Times is encouraging a “Yes” vote. The Vancouver Columbian says “No.”
Washington state’s grassroots gun activists are fired up as they haven’t been since they crushed Initiative 676 in 1997. But they are waging a battle on a shoestring budget against billionaires with boatloads of bucks, and the gun control crowd has yet to begin flooding the airwaves with advertising to boost their 30-page gun control scheme.
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
The concern among Washington State gun owners is that Seattle-centric liberals, who allegedly don’t care about Second Amendment rights, will vote for the measure because they don’t understand this isn’t really about guns and the people who misuse them, it’s about protecting rights belonging to all of the people who don’t misuse them. So, maybe it is time to ask some questions about a right that many on the Left lately been fiercely defending by opposing confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
According to a website Legal Voice, there appears to be fairly wide latitude in Washington State for obtaining an abortion. People may get an abortion for any reason, because they have the legal right to do so. The Left doesn’t question this, because it is the law.
As opposed to: “Why does anyone need a semiautomatic rifle?”
You don’t need anyone else’s permission.
As opposed to clearing an “enhanced background check” and providing proof that you have, within the past five years, completed a firearms safety course.
Even if under age 18, abortions are available and “You do not have to tell your parents or get their permission before you have an abortion in Washington. Your medical records about the abortion are confidential,” the website advises.
As opposed to being denied your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms by popular vote until age 21, and then having to waive your medical privacy rights in order to exercise that right to have a firearm.
There is no “waiting period” in Washington State to receive an abortion, the Legal Voice website says.
As opposed to a ten-day waiting period on the purchase of a so-called “semiautomatic assault rifle” after one passes the “enhanced background check.”
Pro-choice advocates have been understandably zealous in defending a right they value against what they feel is an imminent threat of an effort to reverse Roe v. Wade, with Kavanaugh on the high court. That’s expected of anyone defending any right they hold dear.
So, why shouldn’t Second Amendment advocates be equally zealous in defense of a fundamental right that is specifically defined in both the federal and state constitutions?
It’s the classic case of whose ox is being gored, and whose right is in danger of being trampled.
Rights should not be subject to a popular vote, no matter which right is being discussed. And rights are supposed to be inalienable.
