Getting ready for the ban

[GWS]

I wanted to get Springfield Armory SA-35 when the prices became realistic. Now I won't because if one did show up for a MSRP price it would only be a 10 round magazine model with no chance of upgrading to a higher capacity magazine later. I tried to buy some 15 round magazines for months but none have been available. FJI.....

So get the standard 13 round mags

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1371114282?pid=114282
Go with Priority mail to get it here on time

Pick up the SA-35 when you find one.

 

[Flopsweat]

So get the standard 13 round mags

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1371114282?pid=114282
Go with Priority mail to get it here on time

Pick up the SA-35 when you find one.

It might be cheaper in WA after the ban.

 

[lcb97269]

I've been getting ready for the assault rifle and magazine ban in Wash. for several legislative sessions. In addition to writing a lot of letters and sending emails.

Concerning the latest proposal about magazine capacity. There is a grandfather provision included, subject to being able to document when the item was purchased. It mentions that the picture must be shown to have been taken prior to the effective date of the ban. Which I take to be a date / time stamp on a digital picture. The last version of this I read also required that the owner of the magazine had to be in the picture.

Years ago, I had a Sanyo digital camera with the date / time stamp feature that was optional. Well, that got a tool dropped on the screen and broke. Then I adopted an Olympus SP-320 digital camera, nowhere in the small but thick instruction book does it mention such a feature. Nor can I dope it out on the various settings of the actual camera.

Next, I went to the two smart phones my son has given me. Both are Motorola, one newer than the other. The older one, no date / time stamp feature. Nor could I find it on the newer one ("6" ?). At this point, I sent an email to my son asking how I could call up this feature in the newer phone. He sent me back pictures of what my screens are supposed to look like and it showed the date / time stamp option under the watermark feature of the picture settings. Next, I went to my phone and brought up the settings screen. It looked just like the picture my son sent - EXCEPT - the watermark options on MY phone do not include date / time stamp feature.

Which leads me to an observation I've made numerous times in the past. When I'm trying to dope out some internet or otherwise electronics problem, the pictures shown online NEVER SEEM TO MATCH UP WITH MY PARTICULAR DEVICE OR EQUIPMENT. Even if the model number, etc. is the same.

I've heard people refer to "crappy Android phone" and I guess this is an example. But after all, my two Android phones were given to me, my son pays the monthly bill for me, so I really don't have any reason for complaint based on what I pay.

I also have an Alcatel pre-paid flip phone, this is the one I carry with me when I'm away from my place. It has a camera feature, I checked, and needless to say, this one doesn't have a date / time stamp feature either.

Next step, check into some kind of App that I can install on the Android that adds the date / time stamp feature to my images.

For documentation purposes in the future, I'm not sure how pictures taken on such and such a date will be validated as against a picture that has had a date added at a later date. Maybe there is digital information embedded in the picture that reflects this, I don't know.

Easier solution, maybe have one of my kids with a phone take the pictures with theirs and send it to my email.

A person could take a contemporary dated newspaper front page and put that in the picture. But it seems like a person could keep an old newspaper and take a picture of it at a later date any old time.

If the magazine ban law passes, is it expected that we carry around these documentary pictures whenever we have the magazine out with the gun?

Don't comply.

 

[gmerkt]

Don't comply.

I'm older, I'm "getting my affairs in order" as they say. You get into your 70's and you might drop dead any time. I don't want to leave awkward things around for my wife to deal with. I might have more fire in my guts on these issues if I were younger.

 

[shibbershabber]

Don't comply.

There's only so much not complying to do when you can't buy them anymore ... Retailers will comply.

How many guys in the classifieds, here & elsewhere, will sell to you? Most will assume youre a fed or something trying to entrap them.

So dont comply all you want, but except,for trading amongst your buddies, youre going to have a tough time

 

[micdude]

There's only so much not complying to do when you can't buy them anymore ... Retailers will comply.

How many guys in the classifieds, here & elsewhere, will sell to you? Most will assume youre a fed or something trying to entrap them.

So dont comply all you want, but except,for trading amongst your buddies, youre going to have a tough time

Road trip, that's the answer for now

Has anyone heard anything about the lawsuit against this, with Bruin decision I would think that this would go away.

 

[sobo]

Has anyone heard anything about the lawsuit against this, with Bruin decision I would think that this would go away.

It will eventually. But it will have to be litigated first. Which means it will have to be paid for.

Imagine that, gun owners paying to litigate to enforce a Constitutionally enumerated right. That's where we are in the 21st Century, people...

 

[Wombat of Doom]

Well, fellas. I lived under the California mag ban for 18 years before pulling stumps for the PNW and in all that time I know of no honest citizen getting pulled over and searched for illegal magazines.. Any busts that occurred involving magazines were always part of some larger issue such as a DUI or known felon getting pulled over and searched. There were no magazine checkpoints on the road or neighborhood sweeps--EVER! I see no reason to think it will be any different here.
So...Don't be an idiot and the cops won't even look at you.

Everyone here is overthinking themselves into a tizzy. Just go about your normal daily life and the police etc. will be content to ignore this magazine ban as much as I will. The trick to this is the same as most of life--Don't be an bubblegum and you'll be fine.

Peace

I worked at a politically active place in CA. I got searched for mags, guns, knives, etc. I still have a pristine record. So clearly I didn't have anything other than legal items. But I did get searched a lot.

 

[RX-79G]

Imagine that, gun owners paying to litigate to enforce a Constitutionally enumerated right. That's where we are in the 21st Century, people...

Did all the other people who had to litigate to get their Constitutional rights enforced get their trials for free?

 

[sobo]

Did all the other people who had to litigate to get their Constitutional rights enforced get their trials for free?

 

[monkeybutler]

Just two different faces of "it isn't fair."

 

[Knebel]

Did all the other people who had to litigate to get their Constitutional rights enforced get their trials for free?

Probably not but they should have gotten reimbursed by whoever they won the lawsuit over...

 

[RX-79G]

Probably not but they should have gotten reimbursed by whoever they won the lawsuit over...

That's interesting. Does anyone get damages in a SCOTUS trial?

Or are you talking about reparations? "Hey, segregation is illegal. And everyone who put up with it gets $27.50."

 

[lcb97269]

There's only so much not complying to do when you can't buy them anymore ... Retailers will comply.

How many guys in the classifieds, here & elsewhere, will sell to you? Most will assume youre a fed or something trying to entrap them.

So dont comply all you want, but except,for trading amongst your buddies, youre going to have a tough time

Trading what?

 

[American123]

Idaho is a great place to visit, I'm sure non-metro parts of Oregon are as well…

When I travel places I often end up buying things while I am there.

 

[GWS]

Did all the other people who had to litigate to get their Constitutional rights enforced get their trials for free?

A lot of civil rights cases get pro bono legal support.

 

[American123]

A lot of civil rights cases get pro bono legal support.

Not to mention, there are already multiple cases establishing what is already clearly stated in the bill of rights.

It's only the political party that doesn't know the difference between a man or a woman that continue to push to disarm Americans in every way imaginable and therefore require additional litigation.

If an arbitrary 10 round magazine limit can be applied to what Americans are allowed to own, there is no reason that an arbitrary 1 round magazine limit would also be considered on the same principle.

In short - that political party ruins everything. Oh, would you look at the country right now… everything is just fine.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Not to mention, there are already multiple cases establishing what is already clearly stated in the bill of rights.

It's only the political party that doesn't know the difference between a man or a woman that continue to push to disarm Americans in every way imaginable and therefore require additional litigation.

If an arbitrary 10 round magazine limit can be applied to what Americans are allowed to own, there is no reason that an arbitrary 1 round magazine limit would also be considered on the same principle.

In short - that political party ruins everything. Oh, would you look at the country right now… everything is just fine.

You mean "only one party is actively pushing for more gun control".

The other Party hasn't started hearings to my knowledge, to prosecute 18 USC Sec 241/242 violations, put bills to repeal gun control laws, nor actively campaigned on the side of 2A. They may say that they're "for 2A" but..... it was with the help of a couple of their members that the House AWB passed, even though seven (7) members from the actively anti2A party voted against the House AWB.

 

[lcb97269]

A lot of civil rights cases get pro bono legal support.

Last I heard, losers in civil suits pay court cost, but will likely have to be sued again to recover. The NRA has recovered million in bogus civil suits. Unfortunately it is taxpayers paying for it. It should be those who started the bs to pay.

 

[GWS]

You mean "only one party is actively pushing for more gun control".

The other Party hasn't started hearings to my knowledge, to prosecute 18 USC Sec 241/242 violations, put bills to repeal gun control laws, nor actively campaigned on the side of 2A. They may say that they're "for 2A" but..... it was with the help of a couple of their members that the House AWB passed, even though seven (7) members from the actively anti2A party voted against the House AWB.

What anti-gun bill has been written or even sponsored by a Republican. I get that that's a pretty low bar, but it's still a bar the dems can't get over.