- Messages
- 58
- Reactions
- 127
The Spokane County Sheriff said it best after that school shooting last September. It's not a firearm issue. It's a culture issue. Fix the culture.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
kmph said:The state would require background checks for anyone buying a key part that is used to assemble an assault weapon at home under a bill by Assemblyman Mike Gipson of Carson.
I think they wanted us to believe that they're not really going after the parts, but if you read this story posted by @Caveman Jim in another thread, it shows that they really do want to regulate parts......
<broken link removed>
Now we know and need to stop SB 6620.
Ray
Looks to me like the (parts) section has been removed and there is no DOL reporting for the longguns. No possess under 21 has been amended to no purchase until 21 but possession at 18 via a family transfer. Pretty crappy that the gun bill cannot stand on it's own they have to slide it in as a rider on a school safety bill. We all know that most of the liberal left are slime balls and there are a lot of 2a proponents calling all the reps daily. How do you think all the gun bills were killed to begin with. Frankly this one may not even make it all the way!
Interesting -- I just looked at the revised bill and all the stuff about tactical blah blah has been removed. I think that is good, but the fact that they simply identify any semi-auto as an offending item is at the same time pretty worrisome, as if it hints at future even more draconian legislation.
This is better news I suppose than from what I original heard about the bill. I was so nauseated by it and the others that I didn't bother reading any further than the Assault Weapon Ban and Gun Lock Up bills.
However, I don't think I will be partaking in Washington's licensing system. Is it for every rifle and handgun you own? I wonder what they will do to me if I refuse? Gun confiscation? Will I stay and find out?
The state already doesn't have money to expand its road system, maintain its roads, deal with the homeless junkies taking over the streets. This is going to require a lot of tax money to enforce this licensing system. If the licensing scheme isn't worse enough they probably will implement a state income tax to help fund this multi-million dollar gun licensing operation. That will require a hell of a lot of extra resources for law enforcement, IT people, bookkeepers, etc.. A good number of this people already are having to pay $1000 to register their car every year to fund a light rail system that will be built in 15 to 20 years.
But the state of Washington loves to find any means to impose a tax and ban, whether or not they can effectively enforce it or perhaps just scare you into thinking they can.