Washington GREAT NEWS EVERYONE!!! Washington Gun Control Bills Fail to Meet Deadline

[flydipper]

Two problems that the amended version still have is it creates a registry through the DOL so a generation and a half or so nobody will have anything legally unregistered. Two is it gets the wording Assault Weapon on the books ie it defines and has been made into law what the definition of an Assault Weapon is!

 

[Slobray]

Everyone needs to read section 29(g) again:

(29) "Assault weapon" means:
//snip//
(g) A conversion kit, part (singular), or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.

emphasis mine

In my layman's way of thinking, this abomination defines all pistol grips, folding/telescoping stocks, thumbhole stocks, handgrips, flash suppressors, muzzle breaks, muzzle compensators and threaded barrels* as "Assault Weapons", whether they are attached to a firearm or not. Note that it doesn't say "A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts and applicable firearm are in the possession or under the control of the same person."

We are told that the purpose of this bill is to make purchasing a so-called "assault weapon" the same as purchasing a pistol. So, if I'm understanding this correctly (and I may not be), since the above parts are considered "assault weapons" (firearms)(which the bill states), to buy/sell any of those parts, the following requirements must be met (All taken from the text of the bill):

• Only FFL's can sell them,
• A background check must be completed to buy them,
• There's a five day waiting period, unless the buyer holds a CPL,
• The buyer must fill out an application containing:
  1. Full name, residential address, date and place of birth, race, and gender;
  2. Date and hour of the application;
  3. driver's license number or state identification number;
  4. a description of the pistol or assault weapon including the make, model, caliber and manufacturer's number if available at the time of applying for the purchase of a pistol or assault weapon. If the manufacturer's number is not available at the time of purchase of the pistol or assault weapon, the application may be processed, but delivery of the pistol or assault weapon to the purchaser may not occur unless the manufacturer's number is recorded on the application by the dealer and transmitted to the chief of police of the municipality or the sheriff of the county in which the purchaser resides;
• Send a copy of said application to the chief of police or sheriff,
• DOL "may" keep copies of said application,
• Must be 21 to buy the parts,
• Can't give the parts to someone under 21, unless they're family,
• Can't give or sell parts to someone (other than family) without a background check,
• Dealer can charge a fee for said background check on parts,
• No one from out of state may buy those parts.

I personally believe that this was written into the bill on purpose, to try to punish all those "murderous gun nuts" who think that building their own "assault weapons" is going to stop them from being registered. Why else would that be written into the bill? Stupidity may be a plausible answer, but I'm not buying it.



Ray
* All parts labeled in the bill that turn a rifle into an 'assault weapon".

 

[11Charlie]

Everyone needs to read section 29(g) again:

emphasis mine

In my layman's way of thinking, this abomination defines all pistol grips, folding/telescoping stocks, thumbhole stocks, handgrips, flash suppressors, muzzle breaks, muzzle compensators and threaded barrels* as "Assault Weapons", whether they are attached to a firearm or not. Note that it doesn't say "A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts and applicable firearm are in the possession or under the control of the same person."

We are told that the purpose of this bill is to make purchasing a so-called "assault weapon" the same as purchasing a pistol. So, if I'm understanding this correctly (and I may not be), since the above parts are considered "assault weapons" (firearms)(which the bill states), to buy/sell any of those parts, the following requirements must be met (All taken from the text of the bill):

• Only FFL's can sell them,
• A background check must be completed to buy them,
• There's a five day waiting period, unless the buyer holds a CPL,
• The buyer must fill out an application containing:
  1. Full name, residential address, date and place of birth, race, and gender;
  2. Date and hour of the application;
  3. driver's license number or state identification number;
  4. a description of the pistol or assault weapon including the make, model, caliber and manufacturer's number if available at the time of applying for the purchase of a pistol or assault weapon. If the manufacturer's number is not available at the time of purchase of the pistol or assault weapon, the application may be processed, but delivery of the pistol or assault weapon to the purchaser may not occur unless the manufacturer's number is recorded on the application by the dealer and transmitted to the chief of police of the municipality or the sheriff of the county in which the purchaser resides;
• Send a copy of said application to the chief of police or sheriff,
• DOL "may" keep copies of said application,
• Must be 21 to buy the parts,
• Can't give the parts to someone under 21, unless they're family,
• Can't give or sell parts to someone (other than family) without a background check,
• Dealer can charge a fee for said background check on parts,
• No one from out of state may buy those parts.

I personally believe that this was written into the bill on purpose, to try to punish all those "murderous gun nuts" who think that building their own "assault weapons" is going to stop them from being registered. Why else would that be written into the bill? Stupidity may be a plausible answer, but I'm not buying it.



Ray
* All parts labeled in the bill that turn a rifle into an 'assault weapon".

On a Friday Ray!! Really your making my head hurt!
I don't trust a damn thing these jack azz's put on paper. There is always something hidden to make our lives miserable.

 

[teflon6string]

Congratulatory high fives are exactly what the anti-2A rats want us to exchange - just for today. Not to be a wet blanket, but anything the anti-gun lobby doesn't take away from gun owners right now, they will take away soon.

Although their ideals are tragically skewed, these hack politicians are trained, educated, passionate and anything but stupid. Any bill they don't get to pass first time around in these three blue states (California, Oregon and Washington) was simply because of a mis-step or a technicality. This only serves to make them re-double their efforts and make damn sure it doesn't elude them next time.

Sadly, they are experts committed to destroying everything about the Second Amendment one duplicitous and sneaky increment at a time.

 

[Slobray]

On a Friday Ray!! Really your making my head hurt!
I don't trust a damn thing these jack azz's put on paper. There is always something hidden to make our lives miserable.

Sorry about your head brother, but I had to expound on what I said yesterday to point out how terrible and overreaching this bill really is and that everyone needs to keep fighting this. I also did it in the hopes that someone would point out my mistakes and show me that I'm wrong.

This law would pretty much ban internet sales of parts also, because no online dealer is going to want to deal with the hassle of having to send all of that stuff to an FFL, besides being cost prohibitive to buy online and pay the transfer fee.

If this piece of sh.., um, legislation passes and I am right, you know that Inslee and his butt boy Turd Ferguson will be all over enforcing it. If this passes, as is, it will cause those two and all their anti buddies to cream on themselves and each other.

I don't know, either way, but maybe one of our resident lawyers, like @WALawyer and/or @WWShooter can weigh in on that aspect of the bill.


Ray

 

[awshoot]

Everyone needs to read section 29(g) again: ...So, if I'm understanding this correctly (and I may not be), since the above parts are considered "assault weapons" (firearms)(which the bill states)...

It sure does read that way. Get yourself a table top CNC or 3D printer and DIY. That is outside this law at least insofar as no dealer is involved in the gun part and so no paperwork would be necessary.

EDIT: wait -- you're totally correct. You aren't going to DIY your barrel (I was thinking easy stuff like mags, grips, or stocks), at least not without a substantial investment in equipment. So all those $350 upper combo kits, or a target sear, a simple spring or shim set -- anything -- will have to go through the BS.

 

[11Charlie]

It sure does read that way. Get yourself a table top CNC or 3D printer and DIY. That is outside this law at least insofar as no dealer is involved in the gun part and so no paperwork would be necessary.

EDIT: wait -- you're totally correct. You aren't going to DIY your barrel (I was thinking easy stuff like mags, grips, or stocks), at least not without a substantial investment in equipment. So all those $350 upper combo kits, or a target sear, a simple spring -- anything -- will have to go through the BS.

I can't like that post! I hope to god this doesn't pass and it gets shot down! pun totally intended.

 

[awshoot]

Thinking about this a bit more:

(g) A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which
an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the
possession or under the control of the same person.​

So an assault weapon is a collection of parts from which an assault weapon can be assembled. And from the rest of the provision, an assault weapon is one which can accept a magazine and fire semi-automatically. So a collection of parts which EXCLUDES the lower receiver, cannot: fire semi-automatically, nor can you attach a pistol grip, nor can it have any sort of attached stock folding or otherwise, but most importantly of all, it cannot accept:

(a) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:
​

The hypothetical AR15 complete parts kit (minus lower receiver), is NOT an assault weapon because it is impossible for it to function as one. No amount duct tape or wishful thinking is going to make it possible to assemble those parts into an assault weapon without the lower that glues it all together. Until you have a lower with all those other parts, the collection is not an AW.

At least that would be my argument, FWIW (and that ain't much).

 

[awshoot]

Can anyone think of a conversion kit that transforms a non-semiauto rifle into semiauto? Does such a think exist? Maybe this is getting at stuff which for example, makes it possible to convert an SKS to having a detachable mag system.

 

[11Charlie]

Can anyone think of a conversion kit that transforms a non-semiauto rifle into semiauto? Does such a think exist? Maybe this is getting at stuff which for example, makes it possible to convert an SKS to having a detachable mag system.

Off the top of my head no. But that doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[Slobray]

Thinking about this a bit more:

(g) A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which
an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the
possession or under the control of the same person.​

So an assault weapon is a collection of parts from which an assault weapon can be assembled. And from the rest of the provision, an assault weapon is one which can accept a magazine and fire semi-automatically. So a collection of parts which EXCLUDES the lower receiver, cannot: fire semi-automatically, nor can you attach a pistol grip, nor can it have any sort of attached stock folding or otherwise, but most importantly of all, it cannot accept:

(a) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a
detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:
​

The hypothetical AR15 complete parts kit (minus lower receiver), is NOT an assault weapon because it is impossible for it to function as one. No amount duct tape or wishful thinking is going to make it possible to assemble those parts into an assault weapon without the lower that glues it all together. Until you have a lower with all those other parts, the collection is not an AW.

At least that would be my argument, FWIW (and that ain't much).

At first, I thought that too, but the more I looked at the way it's written, I noticed that (a) thru (g) are each they're own individual stand alone definition of what constitutes an "assault weapon". I believe that since they are stand alone definitions, each section means exactly what it says. I also believe that they wrote it that way on purpose, leaving out the part about having the appropriate semiautomatic firearm along with the conversion kit, part, or combination of parts.

These people are not stupid (as much as we'd like to believe they are), they have been watching the states with an AWB (PDRK, CT, DC, HI, MD, MA, NJ, NY) and learning from their mistakes and introducing language to close the "loopholes" that the others missed. The one fix that stands out to the the most to me is (b) (it reads "A semiautomatic pistol, or a semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition"): it's their fix for the "bullet button loophole". Bullet button - Wikipedia

They are testing the language to see what holds up and what doesn't. It will keep evolving and will only end when all guns are outlawed. They want to keep us on the defensive and if they can punish/inconvenience us gun owners, even for a little while, then that's a bonus.

If this passes, they may call it a mistake and promise to correct it next session. Their hope is that they can steal (yes, steal, as I don't trust this mail in ballot scheme) enough seats in the legislature this year, that they won't have to correct it, instead they will add to it.

You know while writing this, I think that the above is why they haven't even proposed an AWB in Oregon; they know that the OR legislature will stay democrat, so they will try this watered down bill in WA (which they don't have a strong enough majority in the legislature to push an AWB), see what sticks and then move on to OR for the full AWB.

Either way, I really hope this doesn't pass, but if it does, I hope you're right.


Ray

 

[WALawyer]

Sorry about your head brother, but I had to expound on what I said yesterday to point out how terrible and overreaching this bill really is and that everyone needs to keep fighting this. I also did it in the hopes that someone would point out my mistakes and show me that I'm wrong.

This law would pretty much ban internet sales of parts also, because no online dealer is going to want to deal with the hassle of having to send all of that stuff to an FFL, besides being cost prohibitive to buy online and pay the transfer fee.

If this piece of sh.., um, legislation passes and I am right, you know that Inslee and his butt boy Turd Ferguson will be all over enforcing it. If this passes, as is, it will cause those two and all their anti buddies to cream on themselves and each other.

I don't know, either way, but maybe one of our resident lawyers, like @WALawyer and/or @WWShooter can weigh in on that aspect of the bill.


Ray

You are right, the definition is really bad. Particularly because it defines "assault weapon" by defining it as a part or combination of parts from which an assault weapon can be assembled. This is definition by tautology. You can't define something by referencing that which you are defining.

My guess is that the legislature is not intending to regulate all stocks, grips, suppressors, etc. with this language, but rather certain kits/parts that are integral to making an "assault weapon" (whatever that is), such as receivers, barrels, etc. However, I do agree that this language is broad enough to be interpreted how you are interpreting it.

 

[Crohnos01]

I am leaving Washington state (the entire Northwest, most likely) one way or another, it is just a question of how soon I will bail. It depends on how crazy whatever laws they pass. Whatever they cannot pass now, I am sure they will get through eventually. Last I checked, Washington state isn't getting any more conservative and liberal Californians/East Coasters are moving here in droves. They all want "SENSIBLE" gun control, i.e. banning them from law-abiding citizens, but pampering , aiding and abetting the criminals who use firearms to commit crimes

This ^^

I figure I have about 10 or 12 years of working my arse off before I go to part time status. The day that happens, I am putting a for sale sign in the front yard and getting out of Kommiefornia North. I just hope that the twits don't manage to commit treason against the second ammendment before I leave

 

[11Charlie]

This ^^

I figure I have about 10 or 12 years of working my arse off before I go to part time status. The day that happens, I am putting a for sale sign in the front yard and getting out of Kommiefornia North. I just hope that the twits don't manage to commit treason against the second ammendment before I leave

That makes two of us. I am actually starting to think about a plan B in case I have to sell the business, home and pack up the family sooner than planned.

 

[Stomper]

Y'all need to adjust your thinking a bit. The F-tards sitting in the legislature can draft up all sorts of sheite on a piece of paper, put it through a ceremonial process, then have another F-tard in charge sign it, then put a gold sticker on it and call it a law....


For all that, they can't TAKE your rights.... you SURRENDER them.


The only way to back these A-hats down with all their fancy pieces of paper is: I WILL NOT comply!



Free citizens live on their feet, captive subjects live on their knees. I'd rather live a short while in this life as a free citizen, rather than a long life on bended knee to a task-master who will NEVER be satisfied until I have nothing left. It's not about how long you live, it's about how you live that matters in the end. We're all going to die someday, how will you live those days you have.... citizen or subject?

 

[Crohnos01]

You have a fair point Stomper. I admire your grit. I would like to think I am cut of the same cloth, but I don't know if I am. I am not saying I would surrender my guns if they found a way to make it illegal to own them, but I don't know if I could be as "in your face" about it as you propose. The signers of the constitution all died broke and early, but we regard them as heros.... I just don't know if I am hero material.

 

[11Charlie]

Y'all need to adjust your thinking a bit. The F-tards sitting in the legislature can draft up all sorts of sheite on a piece of paper, put it through a ceremonial process, then have another F-tard in charge sign it, then put a gold sticker on it and call it a law....


For all that, they can't TAKE your rights.... you SURRENDER them.


The only way to back these A-hats down with all their fancy pieces of paper is: I WILL NOT comply!



Free citizens live on their feet, captive subjects live on their knees. I'd rather live a short while in this life as a free citizen, rather than a long life on bended knee to a task-master who will NEVER be satisfied until I have nothing left. It's not about how long you live, it's about how you live that matters in the end. We're all going to die someday, how will you live those days you have.... citizen or subject?

Your right I took an oath to protect this country. These jack wads definitely fall under the domestic part of that oath!

 

[Stomper]

You have a fair point Stomper. I admire your grit. I would like to think I am cut of the same cloth, but I don't know if I am. I am not saying I would surrender my guns if they found a way to make it illegal to own them, but I don't know if I could be as "in your face" about it as you propose. The signers of the constitution all died broke and early, but we regard them as heros.... I just don't know if I am hero material.

Hero's are just ordinary people suddenly finding themselves in extraordinary circumstances who manage to rise to the occasion.... while scared sheitless.


I do understand your point. Every person has to walk their path, some will echo longer than others.

I'm not judging.

 

[Capn Jack]

Maybe the AG(Anti-Gun) Governator will get the Message!!!

Don't get your hopes up.
There are still too many Demorats and Libertards in our public offices.

 

[slimmer13]

These are the gun bills still active.

Senate Bill 5992 was originally introduced as a trigger modification device ban with broad, overreaching language that would have criminalized modifications commonly made to firearms by law-abiding citizens. Instead, the legislation was amended on the Senate floor to narrow down the definition of the ban to apply only to bump-fire stock attachments. This bill has been scheduled for a public hearing in the House Judiciary Committee on February 9th at 8:00AM.

Substitute Senate Bill 5441 would impose a 6-month firearm prohibition for any person who has been released from a 72-hour mental health evaluation. Current law allows a person to be held for a limited time in order for a mental health professional to determine if the individual, based on allegations of a mental health or substance abuse disorder, is in need of treatment or further commitment. At the end of the evaluation, individuals that are not in need of treatment are released. SB 5441 would nonetheless apply a blanket prohibition of firearm possession to all released individuals, and requires the immediate surrender of all firearms and any concealed pistol license to law enforcement. This legislation removes a constitutional right without any mental health adjudication or judicial determination, and without any due process of law. Currently awaiting a Senate floor vote.

Senate Bill 6298 would expand the list of domestic violence offenses that prohibit firearm possession to also include "Harrassment." Domestic violence is a serious issue and those convicted of violent offenses should be addressed accordingly. However, the definition of harassment under Washington state law is so broadly defined that it includes 37 other crimes, many of which involve no form of actual contact or threat of harm to a person. Under this legislation, even the offenses of graffiti and trespass fall within this umbrella category that could result in a firearm prohibition. Imposing an automatic, blanket ban on constitutional rights for these wildly varying offenses is excessive and unwarranted. Currently awaiting a Senate floor vote.

Substitute House Bill 1122 would require the locking up of one's firearms or else they would potentially face reckless endangerment charges. This intrusive government legislation invades people's homes and forces them to render their firearms useless in a self-defense situation by locking them up. House Bill 1122 is a solution in search of a problem. Currently awaiting a House floor vote.

House Bill 1483 would allow for the destruction of all firearms confiscated by or forfeited to the Washington State Patrol. Like other seized items, these firearms should be sold by law-enforcement to generate revenue instead of spending money to have them destroyed. Currently awaiting a House floor vote.

NRA-ILA | Washington: Additional Gun-Control Bill Fails Deadline, Others Still Moving