JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
"semi-automatic Assault Rifle" is an OXYMORON written by Morons !
WE don't need Assault Politicians Assaulting our rights !
Legally owned guns that never hurt anyone Cannot really be "Assault weapons" by real definition...
as·sault
/əˈsôlt/
verb
  1. 1.
    make a physical attack on.
    "he pleaded guilty to assaulting a police officer"
    synonyms: attack, hit, strike, punch, beat up, thump; More
  2. noun
  1. 1.
    a physical attack.
    "his imprisonment for an assault on the film director"
    synonyms: battery, violence; More
  2. 2.
    a concerted attempt to do something demanding.
    "a winter assault on Mt. Everest"
The prima facie case for "assault" has 3 components:

  1. The defendant acts
  2. The defendant intends to cause the victim to apprehend imminent harmful contact from the defendant
  3. The defendant's action causes the victim to reasonably apprehend such a contact.
Guns are tools, inanimate object incapable of doing anything without a Human Interaction and as such I want the Lawyer to explain to all of us How a Gun can be a defendant ??? Guns Cannot "Act" , guns have NO intent, guns have no action on their own.

So in reality, Doctors who kill patients are Assault Doctors , Drug companies that cause peoples deaths are Assault Drug Companies,
etc. Because THEY can be Defendants in a trial.

It seems to me you left out one glaring example from your last paragraph, namely that of "assault legislators." They assault our intelligence; they assault our constitutional rights (eg. 2A and voting); they assault our property rights; they assault our financial well being; they assault our moral fiber as a nation; they assault our independence and try to substitute dependence on them (eg - increase in numbers on the government dole and homelessness) ...

Need I go on?

So in the future when you are referring to a specific elected official why not fight propaganda and fill in the blank with some of your own:

Assault legislator ________________
Assault speaker _________________
Assault governor ________________

Don't settle for a confused and mis-guided ersatz citizenship when the ennumerated rights of "We the People" are your true birthright.
 
After thinking on this a little more perhaps the term "assault politician" is more inclusive.

Additionally, they assault our safety when they set up sanctuary cities and states.

OK :), I'm done. Carry on...
 
I was told the legal powers that are responsible for enforcing the laws in Benton County are in agreement that the way the law reads, (assault weapon definition & I implementation period) does not take effect until...mid year something's.
So their legal opinion is it's not unlawful to still sell to the <21 crowd. (Not court tested but damn reassuring) Do you believe the State would seek to prosecute EVERY sheriff and county prosecutor for not upholding/enforcing the Jan selling date when it clearly doesn't meet the legal requirements? Selling something that's not defined is not illegal being the legal context.

Now if EVERY COUNTY SHERIFF followed suit... Hmm? I believe there were 38 out of 39 sheriff's that opposed 1639??

I hope to hell every ffl dealer goes down the same selling path even though I know they won't.
Much like those 2a/gun owners that sat on their keister & didn't vote. I hope that "didn't vote" group gets horrible hemmoroids forever. Serves them right..IMHO

Dan
 
SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

I mean how do washington state law makers,not even,know the washinton state constitution
 
After thinking on this a little more perhaps the term "assault politician" is more inclusive.

Additionally, they assault our safety when they set up sanctuary cities and states.

OK :), I'm done. Carry on...
The Slimy Politicians are scoffing at US Laws all the while trying to shove laws that are unconstitutional down our throat.
The US Supreme court in a ruling ordered "Citizens are not to OBEY Unconstitutional laws because they have no Standing and are not enforceable ."
WE the PEOPLE are supposed to be the Government , Reps and such work for us but that seems to get lost once a bonehead gets in Office. Gun Owners with money need to find pro gun Lawyer and start filing suits against the politicians ,Individually,they are not Immune, watch em like hawks out in public and catch em on Camera doing anything illegal, immoral, unprofessional, whatever it may be because we all know they will mess up sometime somewhere.
We have the right to Petition the Government for Redress and Grievances , so paper em up with petitions, burn up their fax machines ,
and make the phones ring off the wall. Get a bunch of pro gun 18-20 year olds to file a lawsuit and seek an Injunction.
People have to get off their duffs and organize and fight these laws all the way to the Supreme Court If necessary!!!
Research backgrounds of them Like they did Judge Kavanaugh , gather evidence and publicly shame them with facts.
We don't threaten or Use Violence , we hammer em with the truth.
 
SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

I mean how do washington state law makers,not even,know the washinton state constitution
It's not that they don't know, it's that they vary between don't care and even to open hostility.
 
Germany was the first country to use the term "Assault Rifle" (Sturmgewehr) Sturm meaning storm or assault and gewehr meaning rifle and also was called the STE 44. It was the first widely produced full automatic rifle to shoot high powered rifle cartridges.
It was during Bill Clinton's era that the term "assault rifle" was used to describe semi-autos as such.
 
Polaris may want to think about how they name their snowmobiles o_O

Polaris.JPG
 
What IS dangerous here is that NOW a state has set down the exact terms and definitions of what an Assault weapon IS, going forward, this now can be applied across the states! Never mind that both the F.B.I. and the U.S.Army have spelled out the EXACT definition which does not include any of the features this B.S. law now includes! What will be interesting is if this makes it to the Courts and they are forced to apply the FED definitions against the States new made up crap!


UP THE REPUBLIC!
 
Germany was the first country to use the term "Assault Rifle" (Sturmgewehr) Sturm meaning storm or assault and gewehr meaning rifle and also was called the STE 44. It was the first widely produced full automatic rifle to shoot high powered rifle cartridges.
It was during Bill Clinton's era that the term "assault rifle" was used to describe semi-autos as such.

STE 44 = STG 44 and it was the term "assault weapon", a fictitious term meaning an evil black rifle.
 
This is in the courts...we're the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit in federal court. First hearing is end of January in the 9th circuit, Tacoma WA.

State laws don't reach outside the state of WA. Federal Laws apply, but Federal definitions don't...1639 CLEARLY IDENTIFIED WHAT IS AN ASSAULT WEAPON IS UNDER WASHINGTON LAW. Regardless of how you feel, what we want, or what the truth is, Washington has it defined one way and its in the RCW now. Any semi auto rifle, that is now an "assault weapon" under WA law.

The shops selling to under age folks, are risking their state dealers license with an AG who WANTS to bust the gun industry. He loves the cameras and he's running for governor...look out! He'll pull their state dealer license the moment he can prove they actually sold a semi auto rifle to a sub 21 YO. The argument that the definitions section of 1639 isn't valid, that's so off base its scary people woke up January 1 and decided that was true. The entire LAW has been passed. Implementation of subsections have dates, the definitions were effectively as soon as the secretary of state validated the election.

I respect other opinions, but I am literally in this every day. I have 4 lawyers on our Federal Claim, all of which have advised me on this. These are lawyers that fight guns laws, that are on our side, who would love to say it's true...but they can't.

Don't like this, blame 60% of your family, coworkers, neighbors, that voted for it. Blame the gun owners that said "it doesn't affect my 270WSM", so it's ok with me. Blame the guns owners that didn't know what it was and didn't vote. Blame yourself, if you didn't stand up and fight like mad against 1639. They have the confidence now, the politicians see the "will of the people" and will vote for all the really ugly crap in this coming legislative session. Mag bans are coming, assault weapon transfer ban is coming, 10 day waits for all purchases are coming, new rules on Red Flag laws are coming (firearms taken if you're reported as a threat, with no due process) and lots more. And its going to happen fast...because we lit it happen. Any firearm owner that voted for State Democratic candidates (a few exceptions, but not many) sealed the fate of all firearms owners.

We're still fighting this. We printed 150,00 info cards, We printed nearly 8000 signs, we testified to state committees, we're meeting with legislators, we're suing the State of Washington. We're not giving up, but the citizens of Washington better wake up before we all end spayed and neutered.
 
1639 CLEARLY IDENTIFIED WHAT IS AN ASSAULT WEAPON IS UNDER WASHINGTON LAW. Regardless of how you feel, what we want, or what the truth is, Washington has it defined one way and its in the RCW now. Any semi auto rifle, that is now an "assault weapon" under WA law.

Yes, it did, however, it did that with an amendment to RCW 9.41.010 in Section 16 of the act (1639).

Then we have Section 17 of the act, which states when it takes effect:
I-1639 said:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 17. This act takes effect July 1, 2019, except for section 13 of this act which takes effect January 1, 2019.

Section 13 is the one that prohibits people under 21 from purchasing an "assault weapon."

I-1639 clearly states that section 13 is the only one that takes effect on January 1, and clearly states that the rest of it takes effect on July 1. Therefore, RCW 9.41.010, which contains the definitions, is not amended until July 1, and hence there is no definition of an "assault weapon" until that time.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'd fire any lawyer that can't or won't see that.

Granted, it's only a temporary loophole, but nobody is arguing otherwise.
 
[QUOTE="Therefore, RCW 9.41.010, which contains the definitions, is not amended until July 1, and hence there is no definition of an "assault weapon" until that time..[/QUOTE]

I understand the reach for the loophole. It's been vetted by some of the best gun rights attorneys and our friendly legislators, its not a valid claim. If they get caught up in it, it does provide a great chance to sue the state of Washington under our state constitution, because we will have a party that has been harmed, and thus has standing before the state court.

Implementation July 1 for other sections, that is correct. However the entire measure is enacted, including the definitions, just not implemented. The age restriction rely on the definitions, not the other subsection pertaining to other parts of the measure.

We're hoping we are granted the injunctive relief at the first hearing, however the judge has already allowed Alliance for Gun Responsibility to be added as a defendant, so now the other side has twice as many lawyers talking to the judge. Expected, but still not a great thing for the federal case.
 
Don't like this, blame 60% of your family, coworkers, neighbors, that voted for it. Blame the gun owners that said "it doesn't affect my 270WSM", so it's ok with me. Blame the guns owners that didn't know what it was and didn't vote. Blame yourself, if you didn't stand up and fight like mad against 1639. They have the confidence now, the politicians see the "will of the people" and will vote for all the really ugly crap in this coming legislative session. Mag bans are coming, assault weapon transfer ban is coming, 10 day waits for all purchases are coming, new rules on Red Flag laws are coming (firearms taken if you're reported as a threat, with no due process) and lots more. And its going to happen fast...because we lit it happen. Any firearm owner that voted for State Democratic candidates (a few exceptions, but not many) sealed the fate of all firearms owners.
And blame the 60% who couldn't be bothered to GET OFF THEIR DEAD A**ES, pick up a pen, fill out their ballot and mail it in. Anything short of an active vote AGAINST this crap every time, including a sit on hands, is a passive vote FOR more of it.
 
Personally, I think WA is a lost cause, and it's not just about gun rights. I moved here in 1979 and thought it was the best place on earth, now I see it moving in the direction where .gov doesn't trust their citizens with their own freedoms. There's no point in going on a rant about this and that, it's all been said here before.

Temporary reprieves from the inevitable may be fun to think about but really, the writing is on the wall.
 
The act adds the definition by modifying current law, you can't modify current law without implementing the change, that's what implementing means.

Enacted means the act was activated, turned on, etc. It's active, but it specifically says that nothing changes (expect people under 21 buying "assault weapons") until July 1. It hasn't modified the law that has the definitions yet, and it won't until July 1, as illustrated by looking at the state code.
 
I appreciate the desire to seek the loophole. Below is email I received from a very well connected, gun rights attorney.

"I would absolutely not recommend considering it a real thing, a loophole, or worthy of risking your liberty to test. As a lawyer, it's the kind of really interesting question you'd love to have someone pay you to argue. Like if some lawyer I know recommends me to their client as a criminal defense attorney because they can't see another way of getting their client off. I'd be excited; someone at risk of jail or loss of FFL would sell their house to pay me for infinite work. I've now read two news stories about dealers who talk like they want to be that client, risking everything for me or some other lawyer to get an interesting mental exercise. I would never recommend that someone put his livelihood at risk for a test sale, which could only test a law we are already challenging and which could bring the full wrath of the state AG on your head. You wouldn't take that kind of risk handling a weapon; don't take that kind of risk handling a loaded AG and state law."
 
I appreciate the desire to seek the loophole. Below is email I received from a very well connected, gun rights attorney.

"I would absolutely not recommend considering it a real thing, a loophole, or worthy of risking your liberty to test. As a lawyer, it's the kind of really interesting question you'd love to have someone pay you to argue. Like if some lawyer I know recommends me to their client as a criminal defense attorney because they can't see another way of getting their client off. I'd be excited; someone at risk of jail or loss of FFL would sell their house to pay me for infinite work. I've now read two news stories about dealers who talk like they want to be that client, risking everything for me or some other lawyer to get an interesting mental exercise. I would never recommend that someone put his livelihood at risk for a test sale, which could only test a law we are already challenging and which could bring the full wrath of the state AG on your head. You wouldn't take that kind of risk handling a weapon; don't take that kind of risk handling a loaded AG and state law."
Spot on!
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top