Senate panel flexes muscle, blocks gun bills

February 22, 2013 @ 3:16 pm

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.


(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
More Local News
Top Stories
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (17)


  • Add A Comment

  • WAmovesRight wrote...
    Mixed Feelings...
    February 9, 2013 7:50 am
    Some thoughts:

    If I can anonymously run a background check on somebody and I'm not required to register the firearm in the transaction there is some merit. I DO NOT want something that will end up as a registry.

    However, then there is the issue of privacy. If I can anonymously run a background check to sell a firearm, then I could do so on the dude my daughter is going out with (come to think of it... not a bad idea.).

    If the intent was to truly make the streets safer those of us on the Pro-gun side would be open and evenly contributive to some ideas. However, history has shown it's not about making things safer... It's about taking rights and freedoms.

    I'd rather not... thanks.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SickofSeattleite wrote...
    ALL THE GUN LAWS YOU MAKE
    February 9, 2013 8:02 am
    wont stop people from brutally stabbing each other!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    This looks like registration to me
    February 9, 2013 8:04 am
    Interesting that a Mr Hope is SPD. I wonder if he knows who stole the chiefs Glock?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RnD_Fan wrote...
    It's going to cost you!
    February 9, 2013 9:16 am
    Get ready to pay to transfer that gun to your Daughter or Son.

    At least $25 or more.

    This is a Gun Registry

    Don't let them fool you, this is going cost you time, money and a hassle!

    Thank you Pam Roach for standing up for our 2nd Amendment Rights!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    Don't let them fool you, this is going cost you time, money and a hassle!
    February 9, 2013 10:30 am
    and save kids lives. What a hassle!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • bigdogina4x4 wrote...
    CH
    February 19, 2013 11:51 am
    no it won't
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Pair o'dimes wrote...
    So I guess it doesn't matter who buys a gun...
    February 9, 2013 10:59 am
    I understand that requiring a background check is perceived as a limit to a second amendment right. But all our rights have checks and balances, for example the freedom of speech and the classic "shouting fire in a theater", and you would probably have to get a permit to hold a parade or a demonstration. My freedom of religion is limited as to where I can publicly practice it. Other freedoms are constantly examined and discussed, and we have seen changes in how they are applied, for example cruel and unusual punishment, right to privacy, unreasonable search and seizure, and so on. With the changes we have seen in the ability of firearms to do damage and the rise of mental problems among the general populace, would it be so bad to make sure that lunatics and criminals can't obtain guns legally?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    It won't save kids lives
    February 12, 2013 2:24 pm
    we all know you don't care about kids lives. 99.99% of us do.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • hnuh wrote...
    02-13-2013 To ease concerns...
    February 13, 2013 10:33 am
    The purpose of the left in this is to disarm the public. Incrementalism is the reason for these increasing regulations. The "kids" are completely meaningless to the left. Look at fast and furious for example. Once disarmed the public cannot mount any significant resistance to the designs of the left no matter how insane they get.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    When will the Left ever attempt to stop the murders on the streets of Seattle and other cities?
    February 13, 2013 12:25 pm
    is it because of the color of their skins?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    When will the Left ever attempt to stop the murders on the streets of Seattle and other cities?
    February 13, 2013 2:24 pm
    when We Americans take the guns away from you republicans!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Zoeller wrote...
    @ CH Dumb A $$
    February 13, 2013 2:49 pm
    I am very confident that 99.9% of the gang bangers, crack addicts, and welfare rats that are shooting each other and robbing people at gun point in Seattle are all Democrats. After all they have to keep voting for their free government handouts.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }