Thanks everyone!
Here are some more talking points cut and pasted from the WA Civil Rights Association FB page:
TALKING POINTS (copy or add your own)
This bill is directly based on a racist Alabama law that was specifically designed to disarm blacks—a population that the ruling class was afraid of at the time.
The emergency clause request was misrepresented. House Majority Leader Drew Hansen said he was told that Washington State Patrol requested the emergency clause in amendment 467. Representative JT Wilcox said that his staff confirmed that WSP did not request the emergency clause.
The bill still prohibits employees from open carrying inside their place of business, because they don’t specifically own or lease the property
Prohibited weapons don’t even include those used in riots this last year: frozen water bottles, glass bottles, and fireworks
.
People living in or near a protest like CHAZ/CHOP would be legally prohibited from entering or leaving their home if they wish to protect their families by carrying a firearm
Threatening someone with a firearm or hurting someone with a firearm is already illegal, this bill therefore only criminalizes the mere peaceful presence of a firearm, meaning it is just a tool to suppress speech.
This bill makes private property public by allowing for a private business’s front area and parking lot to be considered a “public place” that protesters can occupy and prevent lawful carry at.
The intent is clearly to suppress the speech of those the bill sponsors disagree with: firearm owners, while empowering the speech of violent individuals who use fireworks, frozen water bottles, glass bottles, etc. as weapons like during the 2020-21 Washington riots
King Soopers was and is a place that prohibits open carry, this did not stop, prevent, or hinder in any way an evil person from using a firearm to kill others despite being a violation of their open carry policy. This demonstrates open carry bans DO NOT stop evil people, if anything they are encouraged by them being soft targets.
The 9th circuit ruling about open carry used the logic that Hawaii has historically banned open carry, therefore it can continue to ban open carry. By that same logic since Washington has historically allowed open carry, they cannot ban open carry. Further other circuits have ruled in favor of carry and there is currently a case (NYSRPA v Corlett) before the Supreme Court regarding carrying a firearm outside the home, the legislature should not ban what the supreme court likely will rule cannot be banned.
Feel free to add your own points as well