Washington Crystal ball time, how do u think WA mag ban will be enforced & to what extent?

[sobo]

but in terms of using the mags, will this have any effect on anyone at all I wonder?

None whatsoever.

A totally stoopit law with no enforcement capability which will do nothing to accomplish what it was ostensibly enacted to prevent/reduce.
Even more "high-capacity" magazines will find their way into the state. It's always this way when something is banned - a black market will develop.
A complete waste of taxpayer resources.

 

[Old Dog]

Nonono @GDragich it's not "Sideshow Bob," it's "Pedo Bob" or "Rumored Child Molester Bob Ferguson"... c'mon, gotta get your names straight, man!

With apologies to Kevin Smith, I call them "Dictator Jay" and "Stupid Bob." It would be so nice if Bob was "Silent Bob," but every time he opens his mouth he validates what Ben Franklin said back in the day. Or whoever said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

And again, I say that these guys seem like the kind of tools that got beat up for their lunch money every day in middle school...

 

[ma96782]

"Ask me no questions......and I'll tell you no lies."

FJB and the rest of them anti-gun folks.

Aloha, Mark

BTW......lessons that most here have already learned.

 

[Diamondback]

With apologies to Kevin Smith, I call them "Dictator Jay" and "Stupid Bob." It would be so nice if Bob was "Silent Bob," but every time he opens his mouth he validates what Ben Franklin said back in the day. Or whoever said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

And again, I say that these guys seem like the kind of tools that got beat up for their lunch money every day in middle school...

Do a search on my username, and I think a while back I posted what our late family attorney (one of the few good guys in law, God rest his soul) told me many years ago about Inslee's favorite bully-boy tricks in the courtroom... instead of deepest pockets stomp on the dude least able to defend himself, then offer a deal of "say what I want against this guy who's my next target and we'll MAYBE see about knocking a few bucks off your tab depending how much we wring out of the other guy," welsh, rinse and repeat.

 

[Old Dog]

Do a search on my username, and I think a while back I posted what our late family attorney (one of the few good guys in law, God rest his soul) told me many years ago about Inslee's favorite bully-boy tricks in the courtroom... instead of deepest pockets stomp on the dude least able to defend himself, then offer a deal of "say what I want against this guy who's my next target and we'll MAYBE see about knocking a few bucks off your tab depending how much we wring out of the other guy," welsh, rinse and repeat.

Not in the least surprised.

 

[44Brent]

The Supreme Court could strike down the similar California magazine ban as soon as THIS WEEK. If the California ban goes, so does the Washington ban.

If you are unfamiliar with what is happening in the courts, watch this video

 

[Yarome]

It won't be enforced.

At most, it might be an add on/throw away charge for DAs in a plea deal with criminals.

This.

IMO, It's mainly a long-con prohibition with little impact in the short term, however, the main intent seems mainly as a stepping stone to more restrictive and enforceable legislation. Ie., possession laws with strict burdens of proof. Like what they are trying to do in WA with those firearm inheritance laws requiring the burden of provenance.

 

[bradsteen]

Who arbitrarily decided 10 was enough? Is 10 enough for police, for politicians armed security, for celebrity armed security, for government personnel, for the military? Likely not, so why is 10 enough for the civilian?

If you were able to ask them, I'm pretty sure that conversation would go something like this... (warning, satire ahead)

Interviewer: "So tell me, how did you come up with 10 rounds as the magazine capacity?"

Politician: "Oh, we used the VERY LATEST research to figure that out. It was NOT CHEAP either, that's for sure!"

Interviewer: "Really? How much did you spend on it?"

Politician: "Millions, but it was worth every penny!"

Interviewer: "And who payed for it?"

Politician: "Well, the gun control lobby, of course! They have the dough!"

Interviewer: "But wouldn't that be a conflict of interest to only use research from the group that represents one side of the issue, and who also happens to be a major campaign donor of yours?"

Politician: "Ha! That's funny! You're a funny guy! 'Conflict of interest'! I gotta remember that one!"

Interviewer: "Riiight... So, for this research, did you analyze real-world defensive gun usage statistics and law enforcement use of force to see how many bullets it took to stop bad guys in various situations, and then apply a weighting criteria to ensure that the chosen capacity would cover all but the most extreme scenarios?"

Politician: "What?! Ewww, god no. That would take FOREVER, and there's no guarantee we would get the results we needed. We took a poll and asked a bunch of people what sounds right to them, and the overwhelming majority were in support of 10 rounds or even less!"

Interviewer: "But in the public hearing on this bill, out of the ~1,650 public submissions that were received, nearly 1,500 of those were against the measure, and only about 150 were in favor. It would seem public opinion in the open forum doesn't line up with your... findings... if 90% of the respondents were vehemently opposed."

Politician: "Nonsense! That was just noise kicked up by the pro-gun lobby! Those weren't real people submitting those comments! Come on, everyone knows that most REASONABLE PEOPLE support this COMMON SENSE measure! In fact, we COMPROMISED on this!"

Interviewer: "Huh. I wouldn't really call that a compromise... why not 20, or 15? Why 10? Doesn't that seem kinda... low? Most full-sized handguns have magazine capacities between 15 and 20 rounds."

Politician: "Well, we REALLY wanted to go with 6 rounds, but apparently that sounded too restrictive to SOME PEOPLE." *eye roll* "That and our PR firm said it had too much of a 'Wild West' vibe, and that image just doesn't fly over here. It's too... redneck."

Interviewer: ...

Politician: "Besides, 15 was a non-starter for the gun control lobby, and they're 'payin' the bills', if ya know what I mean!" *finger guns* "Besides, who the heck needs 15 bullets to take out a mugger?!"

Interviewer: "Well, if the mugger is on PCP, heroin, methamphetamines, or other drugs, it may easily take more than 10 to stop them."

Politician: "No WAY! That's not even possible! Everyone knows it just takes one or two shots and the bad guy goes down - don't you watch TV?!"

Interviewer: *hands over tablet* "Here are several dash cam videos of police officers firing over 10 rounds each to stop a bad guy."

Politician: *looks at tablet* "Those gross examples of excessive use of force by the police, and CLEARLY are irrelevant to this conversation!"

Interviewer: "Well there's no need to get defensive about - "

Politician: "Here, hold my drink". *snort*

Interviewer: "Sir, did you just do a line of cocaine?"

Politician: "That's crazy talk! I'm just taking my, uh, medication!"

Interviewer: "You take your medication... in powder form... through your nose... while drinking alcohol?"

Politician: "Yeah, yeah, it works faster that way. My doctor said so. That reminds me, I gotta thank Uncle Bloomberg for the drinks! He sure knows how to 'spread the love around', ya know what I mean?"

Interviewer: *slowly shakes head in disgust*

Politician: "Anyways, where was I? ...oh yeah, 10 is the sweet spot! It's double digits, so it seems like a lot to the 'average' folks. Think about it - $1,000 seems like a lotta money, but $999 seems so much less, right?"

Interviewer: "I mean, maybe, if you're a complete idiot."

Politician: "EXACTLY! Besides, it's still restrictive enough to keep our base happy, and we get re-elected for being tough on gun violence! It's a win-win, baby!" *finger guns*

Interviewer: *eye twitch* "So you didn't bother to ask people who actually own and carry guns what they thought?"

Politician: "Sure we did! We asked hunters and police chiefs, and they TOTALLY agreed with us!"

Interviewer: "What about these hundreds of law enforcement professionals over here who think this is a really bad idea that won't do anything to stop gun violence?"

Politician: "Oh, come on! They don't count! They're part of the lunatic fringe, ya know."

Interviewer: "So, the majority of cops 'don't count, and are the lunatic fringe'? Can I quote you on that?"

Politicians: "Uhhhhhh... you do not have my permission to air that statement, and if you do, I will sue you to kingdom come for defamation!"

Interviewer: "Last I checked, the 1st amendment protects my right to free speech. That's necessary in order to have a free press."

Politician: "But it DOESN'T protect HATE SPEECH, and you misquoting me would CLEARLY qualify as hate speech, as the several judges in my pocket will agree."

Interviewer: "I can always fight the lawsuit."

Politician: "Yeah, but with Big Daddy Bloomberg on MY side, YOU'RE gonna lose." *finger guns*

Interviewer: "Wow. Just... wow. So if we exclude the opinions of those hundreds of law enforcement professionals, that still leaves thousands of defensive firearms instructors, citizens who carry concealed every day for work or personal protection, gun shop owners... you know, people that actually own guns for personal protection. What about them?"

Politician: "No way! Those groups are WAY too biased! That'd be like letting the inmates run the penitentiary!"

Interviewer: "And what about the professionals who carry guns - police, private security for VIPs, etc... will these laws apply to them as well?"

Politician: "Absolutely not! They need the biggest guns with the most bullets possible and the thing that goes up! There are some crazy people out there, and I need PROTECTION!"

Interviewer: "Doesn't everyone else have the same right to protect themselves?"

Politician: "Well, in the words one famous author - pretty sure it was Shakespeare - 'all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others'. And I'm the top dog around here, ya know what I mean?" *finger guns*

Interviewer: "Actually, it's a quote from Animal Farm, by George Orwell." *checks watch* "Well, this has been a really... informative... interview. Just to summarize what I've got here:
(a) you picked 10 rounds based solely on marketability and pressure from the anti-gun lobby, not due to any scientific data or analysis of real defensive gun usage or provable metric that supports the gun safety argument,
(b) you cherry-picked polling data to give the illusion of broad public support, while completely ignoring a massive public-forum opposition to the measure, the opinions of hundreds of law enforcement professionals, and countless thousands of law-abiding gun owners,
(c) people who disagree with you are the lunatic fringe,
(d) in your hypothetical penitentiary, we're the inmates and you're the warden,
(e) you are willing and able to use the judicial branch as a cudgel to silence people who disagree with you, and
(f) you very likely have a serious cocaine problem.
Did I get all that right?"

Politician: "STOP TAKING MY WORDS OUT OF CONTEXT! FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS!!!"

 

[Yarome]

Who arbitrarily decided 10 was enough?

I'm sure the decision on 10 had very little to do with empirical data and more on their version of "common sense". The average person has 10 fingers and toes. If that was considered "enough" for the creator it must be "enough" for self defense too.

Or... 10's simply easier to count on your toes between reloads.

Ba-dum-ching!

 

[American123]

If you were able to ask them, I'm pretty sure that conversation would go something like this... (warning, satire ahead)

Wow, you really put a lot of effort into that!

 

[po18guy]

It would be nice if someone would highly publicize buying magazines in Idaho or Oregon and then entering Washington with them and demanding to be prosecuted as an otherwise law-abiding citizen*. 1) It would show that this law has zero application to violent felons or gangsters and 2) it would reveal that thugs who are not worried about felonies will dismiss this meaningless law as less than a parking ticket.

It is progressive grandstanding by governor Ernesto Ché Inslee and Bob "Buttigieg" (pronounced 'butt-judge') Ferguson. It is virtue signaling on the part of feel-good liberals who suffer from "do something disease."

* Can you say multi-million dollar lawsuit?

 

[bradsteen]

Wow, you really put a lot of effort into that!

Yeah, got a bit carried away with the creative writing. It's an occupational hazard, but it's fun at times.

 

[JohnnyMac]

The only thing this ban did was make a whole bunch of politicians (that are completely out of touch with the majority of there constituents) pat each other on the back and be able to post in their twatter feed about how many children's lives they've saved.

 

[Dr Prepper]

On top of that, a 458 SOCOM uses 30 round 556 magazines, but only holds like 9 or 10 rounds, so technically it's not a "high capacity" magazine.

I was thinking this same exact thing. I think the .50 Beowolf uses std mags as well for 9-10rnd mags.

 

[Dr Prepper]

None whatsoever.

A totally stoopit law with no enforcement capability which will do nothing to accomplish what it was ostensibly enacted to prevent/reduce.
Even more "high-capacity" magazines will find their way into the state. It's always this way when something is banned - a black market will develop.
A complete waste of taxpayer resources.

Sure prompted people to buy a buttload moar mags. That's for sure. So really all it did was back fired against the very goal they really intended.

 

[Dr Prepper]

The Supreme Court could strike down the similar California magazine ban as soon as THIS WEEK. If the California ban goes, so does the Washington ban.

If you are unfamiliar with what is happening in the courts, watch this video

Ahh good someone already posted it.

 

[sobo]

It is progressive grandstanding by governor Ernesto Ché Inslee and Bob "Buttigieg" (pronounced 'butt-judge') Ferguson. It is virtue signaling on the part of feel-good liberals who suffer from "do something disease."

For all of the "progressive" pro-gun control people out there...

 

[sobo]

Wow, you really put a lot of effort into that!

Yeah, got a bit carried away with the creative writing. It's an occupational hazard, but it's fun at times.

Now, if we could just find a real "journalist" that would actually do something like that, and an editor that would actually approve something like that for publication, and a paper/website that would actually publish it, we might be on to something...

 

[WAW44]

Here is my qestion.

What happens to every WA located classified ad on NWFA that is selling a firearm with standard capacity (10+) magazines? You know , offering for sale will be now illegal.

Do all the ads get locked at midnight tomorrow, or does NWFA suddenly become a platform supporting illegal activity in WA? Armslist got into trouble in the past, so.....

 

[BAJ475]

Ahh good someone already posted it.

Not only could, they did! Both Duncan and the NJ case were GVR. And remember that Duncan won until it got to the en banc panel, whose opinion was vacated. Now to see if a court in WA will grant a TRO to stop WA's mag ban from going into effect!