Washington Did Washington just ban 80% lowers and pre-1968 guns?

[11Charlie]

So I can't cerekote this on my new lower?!!

 

[JRuby]

My earlier comment was a jest but the fact that what happens in other states specifically Washington seems to eventually impact oregon The idiots who make laws like this one dont just live in California and Washington.

 

[JJF123]

I would make The SN, "1" on any and all that required to have one.

But it sounds like this is a "undetectable " law vs "untraceable "

007

 

[Diamondback]

s/n FVCKY0VF3RG
s/n 5VCK4D1CK
s/n 51C53MP3RTYR4NN15
s/n M0L0NL4B3B1TCH35

 

[awshoot]

barrels weigh over 3.7oz or are they talking about what is actually considered to be the "firearm" IE: AR lower reciever?

if the lower has to have over 3.7oz of steel, most lower parts kit will have that covered. i believe even most 80% glock builds will be fine too. not legal advice. just speculation.

In this state law, and we're not talking some ATF interpretation, but the state law specifically, a firearm is defined as:

(11) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder. "Firearm" does not include a flare gun or other pyrotechnic visual distress signaling device, or a powder-actuated tool or other device designed solely to be used for construction purposes.

In other words, a "firearm" is the entire device -- lock, stock, and barrel -- that slings lead. Don't think of it in this context in the way the ATF does. Now, plug the WA definition of firearm into the definition of "undetectable firearm" (and think of these things as two wholly different items -- hence the color coding):

(33) "Undetectable firearm" means any firearm that is not as detectable as 3.7 ounces of 17-4 PH stainless steel by walk-through metal detectors or magnetometers commonly used at airports or any firearm where the barrel, the slide or cylinder, or the frame or receiver of the firearm would not generate an image that accurately
depicts the shape of the part when examined by the types of X-ray machines commonly used at airports.

Now, if you are making your own firearm with all metal parts, the "undetectable" prohibition is not even going to come into play unless it is a very very tiny gun that won't be as detectable as 3.7 oz of stainless. If on the other hand, you are making a gun with non-metallic parts, you are still OK if both of these are true: (a) there is enough metal in the metallic parts of the firearm (as defined above) to set off a metal detector as well as 3.7 oz of stainless would AND (b) the non-metallic parts will show up on xray. When both of these are true, the gun is NOT undetectable and even if untraceable, is OK to build if you do not intend to sell it.

EDIT: redacted section regarding my thoughts on how one could work around the undetectable issue of 3D printed parts for fear it might be perceived as aiding or abetting a person who is prohibited from possessing firearms, in making one (though why a criminal would want to consciously make a firearm detectable to comply with one law, while breaking another in the mere possession, is beyond me). The unconstitutional prior restraint on speech is already working. Ray Bradbury would shake his head at our elected Firemen such as Ferguson and Inslee.

 

[awshoot]

... i believe even most 80% glock builds will be fine too. not legal advice. just speculation.

I would worry if I owned something like the pics shown below because remember, if one of the listed components (barrel or frame/receiver or cylinder/slide) fails to show on xray, no matter how obviously gun-ish the thing is, it is "undetectable" contraband and mere possession is a crime.

 

[awshoot]

... I realize your concern is a state based law but even so it is unConstitutional, as many guns from pre-1968 have no serial numbers, ...

Those are all grandfathered. A firearm can only be untraceable if manufactured after July 1, 2019. No firearm manufactured prior to that date can fit the definition of "untraceable".

 

[Ura-Ki]

Maybe if Inslee gets in as the next potus and brings Fergy in as his vp, you all can feel our pain . God help us all if that happens.

I curse you with the flees of a thousand camals for making such a suggestion! We would all be in a real world of hurt should ether of these turds continue to do more then suck perfectly good Oxygen from Us!

 

[osprey]

I curse you with the flees of a thousand camals for making such a suggestion! We would all be in a real world of hurt should ether of these turds continue to do more then suck perfectly good Oxygen from Us!

I honestly wouldn't wish these two on my worst enemy. I am hoping enough voting public is smart enough to realize these two are not visionaries but ladder climbing imbeciles. Probably too much to ask though. I suppose they are just part of the giant reset that is sure to come.

 

[CDN GUNBUNNY]

I thought we were having problems up here in Canada But I am starting to think all politicians have a hate on for gun owners, regardless of country!

 

[DB is Here]

I thought we were having problems up here in Canada But I am starting to think all politicians have a hate on for gun owners, regardless of country!

I think they despise a free people and love power.

 

[Makers Mark]

When both of these are true, the gun is NOT undetectable and even if untraceable, is OK to build if you do not intend to sell it.

Bold is my emphasis.
I think awshoots analysis makes sense.
This looks to me like the bottom line.
Do not, 'intend to sell'.
Isn't this new state law pretty much a mirror image of the existing federal law on this subject?

And what exactly is going to happen on July 1st? On July 1st the new WA law (same as the existing fed law) goes into effect. So then it will be double illegal.
As a practical matter what does that mean on July 1st other than the above?

 

[awshoot]

... And what exactly is going to happen on July 1st? On July 1st the new WA law (same as the existing fed law) goes into effect. So then it will be double illegal. ...

Yep. You got it. This law mostly makes certain acts illegaler.

The one new thing in this law, is the prohibition against helping people make guns which likely will be used to make 80% kits require a BG check and might even apply to the dissemination of mere information (potential 1A issue there). It is sort of ridiculous that a person can post info about atomic bombs, but share a CAD file? ooooohhh -- eeevil criminal!!

 

[billdeserthills]

Those are all grandfathered. A firearm can only be untraceable if manufactured after July 1, 2019. No firearm manufactured prior to that date can fit the definition of "untraceable".

Then how can they keep track of all he 'untraceable' guns from before that date?

Also my super scary ghost guns (ar-15's) all look the same whether they are from before or after the date mentioned

 

[awshoot]

Tjen how can they keep track of all he 'untraceable' guns from before that date?

Also my super scary ghost guns (ar-15's) all look the same whether they are from before or after the date mentioned

They won't need to keep track -- they would probably just charge you and make you prove that they pre-existed the law.

With that in mind, you should figure out how to document your non-serialized firearms. One potential method -- not positive it would work in court but it is a decent attempt -- is to take multiple pictures of all your non-SN firearms and have those pictures notarized no later than July 1, 2019. Make sure you get pics of any unique markings or blemishes. Then never ever change the firearms and never lose the notarized original photos. Get high quality long lasting photo-prints rather than just print out on junk paper with an inkjet. I would think that notarized pictures would go a long way toward demonstrating that they existed before the law takes effect.

And remember, it is only illegal after that date to make them if you intend to sell. Though what evidence for intent to sell would look like is not clear -- having a lot of the exact same thing? maybe.

 

[DRZ400S]

I will put a ss numer on my 80% it will
Be lickmyballs 2

 

[ferret427]

Forgive me for not citing the relevant parts of the law passed as I am at work and can't spend the time.
I remember seeing a section where any firearm without a serial number was declared contraband. AFAIK anything declared contraband is illegal regardless of when it was made, or any other mitigating circumstances. As contraband, possession is illegal.
Please check the law and correct me if I am wrong.

 

[awshoot]

Forgive me for not citing the relevant parts of the law passed as I am at work and can't spend the time.
I remember seeing a section where any firearm without a serial number was declared contraband. AFAIK anything declared contraband is illegal regardless of when it was made, or any other mitigating circumstances. As contraband, possession is illegal.
Please check the law and correct me if I am wrong.

Fortunattely, incorrect. ;-)

It is any "undetectable" firearm that is contraband no matter when it was made (but these have been illegal under Fed. law for many years anyway). Undetectable relates to metal detectors and xray machines "seeing" the firearm.

The definition of "untraceable firearms", meaning no serial number was affixed by a Federally licensed manufacturer, only applies to those those manufactured AFTER July 1, 2019 -- anything made on or before that date, is by definition NOT untraceable (grandfathered).

Untraceable firearms are NOT contraband, and are only illegal if the maker intends to sell them. If you don't intend to sell, an untraceable firearm is OK to make so long as it is also detectable.

EDIT: the actual text (note the absence of "untraceable"):

All machine guns, bump-fire stocks, undetectable firearms, short-barreled shotguns, or short-barreled rifles, or any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, short- barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, illegally held or illegally possessed are hereby declared to be contraband, and it shall be the duty of all peace officers, and/or any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington, to seize said machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled
rifle, or parts thereof, wherever and whenever found.

Here is the whole prohibition:

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, it is unlawful for any person to:
(a) Manufacture, own, buy, sell, loan, furnish, transport, or have in possession or under control, any machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle;
(b) Manufacture, own, buy, sell, loan, furnish, transport, or have in possession or under control, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle; ((or))
(c) Assemble or repair any machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle; or
(d) Manufacture an untraceable firearm with the intent to sell the untraceable firearm.

 

[quneur]

What if a person just gave away an untraceable firearm?

 

[Diamondback]

What if a person just gave away an untraceable firearm?

Already prohibited by I-594. Wish Roberts would give himself a wakizashi suppository so we could build a SCOTUS with the balls needed to smack this crap down...