Gun shop saves museum display
The other day, there was a story going around about a museum IN Washington State that, because of new gun laws going into effect in the state on December 4th, they were going to have to return guns of a World war II presentation because even the transfer of guns to museum were subject to a background check and a $40 fee. So the Lynden Pioneer Museum, in Lynden made preparations to close the display, but a local gun shop stepped up to help, according to Fox News;
“It’s a financial hardship for them to pay for the fees to register the guns,” said Melissa Denny, owner of Pistol Annie’s Jewelry and Pawn in nearby Bonney Lake, told FoxNews.com. “So we decided to step up and help. It’s normally a $40 fee for each weapon. We just waived it for them.
“I like to champion for the underdog because we are one of them,” added Denny, who opened up her shop two years ago.
Folks say that the law was never intended to affect museums, but the problems is that law abiding gun owners are not going to take a chance that laws don’t affect them, that’s why they’re law abiding citizens.
“[The law] is about making sure people buying guns go through a background check to ensure they’re not convicted felons, domestic abusers, or the seriously mentally ill,” Geoff Potter, spokesperson for Washington Alliance for Gun responsibility, a sponsor of the initiative, told FoxNews.com. “Our view is this situation has nothing to do with 594 and the museum should feel confident in continuing to display the exhibit as scheduled without issue. “
State law enforcement officials told FoxNews.com that they were never planning to go after museums to enforce the new law.
“Initiative 594 is a very new situation due to take effect in December,” Sgt. Will Knudson, spokesman for the Washington State Patrol, said in a statement to FoxNews.com. “The Washington State Patrol has no intent on proactively entering museums to determine if the display of a museum is in compliance.”
Yeah, well, then write your laws so that there is no confusion instead of ramming incoherent garble through your legislatures so that Americans who want to comply with the laws have to make guesses as to your intent.
Category: Guns
They’re right not to take any chances, Jonn. All it takes is one idiot prosecutor pushing an agenda.
If anyone doubts that, just go ask the members of the 2006 Duke University lacrosse team. Or their now-disbarred prosecutor.
Yeah, the Duke students were stupid to hire a stripper for a party. But they weren’t rapists – even though they were damn near wrongly prosecuted for that crime by an ambitious DA looking to further his political career.
Well said, Hondo!
I agree and that’s my whole point.
Yup. Doesn’t matter what the DA or the cops SAY their intent is, the law doesn’t grant any exceptions. DA’s and Cops have lied before and will lie again when it suits their agendas. Best not to take the chances.
Hopefully those stupid gun laws will ALL get overturned. The 2nd amendment plainly states that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
How any government can claim to be able to regulate the private ownership of arms when the amendment clearly prohibits it is beyond me.
The entire bill of rights is best seen as a restraining order against government at all levels. We. the people, need to start demanding that that restraining order be enforced.
“. . . never planning to. . .”
“. . . no intent. . . ”
The Immutable Law of Unintended Consequences” rears its ugly head yet again.
Or as that great modern philosopher Frank Zappa said, “Do you love it, do you hate it, here it is, the way you made it.”
Yep, the law of unintended consequences rides again.
And I would bet that some idiot DA will look to close down a few gun museums just to prove that guns have no place in our modern society !!!
You just know it will happen and some museum curator will spend tens of thousands of dollars and some judge will toss him in jail for a few years….
Lib’s… The stupidity of lib’s never ceases to amaze me…
They passed a law containing a broad restriction, but intended to selectively enforce that broad restriction? Last time I checked, I could’ve sworn that was illegal…
“Folks say that the law was never intended to affect museums.” Folks who write those stupid laws don’t care about the consequences unintended or otherwise of the drivel they get passed. There is so much confusion over I594 that no honest citizen is willing to take a chance of breaking the law. Those who wrote 594 can’t even say with certainty who would be breaking the new law.
The problem is that the people in Seattle and its sprawl who are scared of guns voted for it whereas the people who actually know anything about guns voted against. Unfortunately, we were seriously outnumbered at the ballot box – but the law is being challenged, I’m told, by numerous groups.
It’s so bad a law that LAW ENFORCEMENT came out against it in the run-up to elections as being practically unenforceable, but since when do these people take law enforcement’s word for anything?
Well done, Melissa Denny! Well done indeed.
“State law enforcement officials told FoxNews.com that they were never planning to go after museums to enforce the new law.”
Yeah, sure. I’m sure that’s the same thing NY State was telling people before the gummint passed the SAFE Act that was unenforceable AND literally restricted any fire arm with more than a 7-round magazine.
Then afterwards it was “oh, really? We didn’t know that….” But, its still in effect.
I lived in Washington state, there are plenty of people there who have common sense, its the hipster trash that infests (mostly Seattle and Olympia) that are the problem.
Roflmao “it’s ok. Break the law. We promise we won’t go after you”.
Nice try scumbags.