Washington Immediate help needed on mag ban bill! Please help us!

[elitejake]

I sent my letter of frustration, with a bit of clear logic last night. The clear logic included: criminal activity will not be limited by this law. Only law abiding citizens will listen.
And now they want us to fight evil from behind the power curve even more now. Because the ship has sailed on mags. Don't put laws on people to fill gaps where the existing laws are not being used. Enforce the ones we have. Give the police their teeth back!

 

[Lennie]

Thanks zcap.

I emailed everyone an individual email. I only hope everyone on NW Firearms does the same. Our concerns and voices need to be heard.

I only wish we could remove Richardson from office. He is using his office for only one thing, and that is to run for governor. He is probably the most politically left driven State Attorney General in the United States. And he likes having an unlimited taxpayer funded bank account to push his agendas.

 

[Lennie]

Only law abiding citizens will listen.

This proposed bill will ensnare unsuspecting owners of sporting rifles like Ruger's 10-22 in its web. I doubt every law-abiding citizen of the state is aware of the consequences or will be aware of this law and the consequences if the anti-second crowd succeeds in their efforts.

 

[Chess Lover]

Email sent to Marko Liias - I'm not in his district, but who cares...

Senator,

I know your mind is already probably made up on this topic, but I must respectfully ask you to reconsider your position on SB 5078. It applies a completely arbitrary cap to how much ammunition a law abiding citizen can carry in a firearm, and that inappropriately restricts their ability to defend themselves.

Take this as an example - if a group of 5 people break into one's home (and the majority of home invasions are perpetrated by groups of 2 - 5 people, so this isn'ta stretch), the homeowner will need to deliver 2 bullets into center of mass on 5 moving targets without missing in an extremely high stress situation. That's a highly unrealistic expectation, given that any police officer, firearms instructor, or federal agent would be hard-pressed to successfully deliver all shots on target in that scenario.

Also, shot placement does not guarantee the threat will stop. If the bad guys (like many home invaders) are under the influence of drugs, it might take more than 10 to stop a single one - numerous officer-involved shootings offer evidence of this.

There are a number of ways we can address gun violence and mass shootings, ways that gun owners will wholeheartedly endorse - nobody wants bad people to get their hands on guns and cause mayhem, gun owners least of all. However, this is not one of them - it's applying wishful thinking and good intentions to a challenge that requires careful thought and consideration. Let's do something that will actually address the problem instead.

As a knowledgeable gun owner who wants to solve these problems just as much as you do, I'm more happy to discuss this matter in depth and answer any questions you might have. Thank you for your time.

Thanks!

Love your email. I sent out at least 18 messages and received no replies from Democrats. My representatives are all Republicans. My senator, Ann Rivers, was supportive with her form letter and claimed to be an avid gun owner. She excused herself from the senate vote on SB 5078, and was the only person to do so. With my two house representatives, one never responded despite the several messages I sent to him and the other sent supportive form letters.

 

[bentoncity]

SB 5078 - 2021-22
Addressing firearm safety measures to increase public safety.
IN THE HOUSE

Feb 12
First reading, referred to Civil Rights & Judiciary (Not Officially read and referred until adoption of Introduction report).
Feb 16
Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Civil Rights & Judiciary at 10:00 AM (Subject to change). (Committee Materials)
Feb 18
Scheduled for executive session in the House Committee on Civil Rights & Judiciary at 3:30 PM (Subject to change). (Committee Materials)


Dan

From the bill....be sure you take/have pictures? WTF? And these people are ELECTED by WHO? And you thought people couldn't any dumber..

(a) The possession of a large capacity magazine by a person who legally possessed the large capacity magazine before the effective date of this section. Legal possession is presumed where a person can provide a photo of the person with the large capacity magazine and the photo can be shown to have been taken prior to the effective date of this section. A person who legally possesses a large capacity magazine under this subsection is subject to the provisions of subsection (3) of this section;

(b) The possession of a large capacity magazine by a person who, on or after the effective date of this section, acquires possession of the large capacity magazine by operation of law upon the death of a former owner who was in legal possession of the large capacity magazine, provided the person in possession of the large capacity magazine can establish such provenance. Legal possession of the former owner is presumed where a person can provide a photo of the former owner with the large capacity magazine and the photo can be shown to have been taken prior to the effective date of this section. A person who legally possesses a large capacity magazine under this subsection is subject to the provisions of subsection (3) of this section;

And lastly..

25 (b) The person shall possess the large capacity magazine only on
26 the property owned or immediately controlled by the person, while
27 engaged in the legal use of the large capacity magazine at a duly
28 licensed shooting range, while engaged in a lawful outdoor
29 recreational activity such as hunting, or while traveling to or from
30 these locations for the purpose of engaging in the legal use of the
31 large capacity magazine, provided that the large capacity magazine is stored unloaded and in a
separate locked container during transport.

Does this mean anyone with a Concealed must carry it unloaded?

 

[Mad Pick]

GREAT video here, showing how to sign in, and discussing what's in this bill:

 

[GunSmoke]

If you haven't already its time to get the fuc* up and start calling, emailing, and getting everyone you know to go comment on this bill. If you can't be bothered to take 5 minutes out of your day to do these things you don't deserve freedom. Men before us fought bloody battles to keep their freedom. Because they knew how important it was. Even if they died, it was for their friends, family, and future generations.
GET UP, TAKE ACTION, AND SPREAD THE WORD!

 

[bradsteen]

Submitted my input as well as the following testimony (4995 characters, just under the limit!):

Legislation affecting a constitutional right must be carefully considered, all possible efforts taken to limit that infringement. The benefit to society must be weighed against the infringement of the individual right, and the legislation should only be passed into law if such benefit is clearly demonstrable and significantly outweighs the potential negative effects of the infringement. Where legislation is passed that does infringe on the rights of citizens, a mechanism for re-evaluation in the future is necessary to ensure the purpose of the law is being served, and to validate that the infringement of that right is still necessary for the public good.

This legislation fails all of the above points. The stated goal is to "increase public safety", but:

It fails to define how public safety will be improved by the measure.

It fails to show evidence that similar measures have been successful.

It fails to define what success looks like, or quantifiable metrics to measure the law's effectiveness.

It fails to provide for periodic re-evaluation / re-assessment of the infringement.

It fails to show how it will be enforced consistently and fairly.

It fails to define how it will prevent discrimination or targeting of specific groups.

It fails to demonstrate what effort (if any) was made to mitigate infringement on constitutional rights.

In short, this legislation will not serve its stated purpose. There are millions of magazines owned by law-abiding citizens in this state. If this measure passes, the number of magazines will not change, but the citizen's status of "law abiding" will be subject to interpretation. This creates a MASSIVE potential for selective enforcement, abuse, and discrimination.

There is no justification to support the "10 bullet" limit. No experts in self-defense or law enforcement were asked for input. The number was selected by persons with no knowledge of firearms, no stake in the outcome, and no interest in the impact on firearm owners.

Unlike what we see in movies, a single bullet will not reliably stop a threat intent on causing harm. For a bullet to have a maximum stopping effect, it must strike a critical area and cause enough trauma to impair the threat's ability to continue causing harm. It often takes multiple shots to the center of mass before the assailant ceases to be a threat. An assailant may stop their attack after only one or two shots, but usually because they CHOOSE to stop, not because they were rendered unable to continue.

Ammunition capacity needs depend on the person's environment. In an area with low crime rates, visible police presence, and limited history of violent encounters, 10 bullets may be adequate for most situations. In an area with higher crime rates, less visible police presence, signs of gang activity, and history of violent incidents by multiple perpetrators, 10 bullets may not be adequate. In an area with where the police are unable to enforce law due to social unrest and violent confrontation against multiple assailants is possible, 10 bullets is not adequate.

Violent crime is often perpetrated by persons under the influence of controlled substances. Numerous law enforcement shootings provide evidence that more than 10 bullets may be necessary to stop a person under the influence of controlled substances, or who is uniquely motivated to cause harm to others. Home invasions and violent alterations often involve multiple perpetrators, who are often armed, and often under the influence of controlled substances.

In the end, if this legislation is passed, law-abiding citizens will be forced to choose between complying with an ill-conceived law that limits their ability to defend themselves and placing themselves in legal jeopardy to ensure an effective means of self-defense.

This legislation will adversely affect the safety of low-income citizens, and those living in high-crime areas. Persons of color are disproportionately represented in these demographics, and will bear the brunt of this effect. For a governing body to consider placing the citizens they have sworn to serve in such an untenable position is unconscionable. Such negligence, arrogance, elitism, and racism has no place in our society.

Gun violence is a serious issue in this country; wishful thinking, good intentions, and infringement on the rights of the citizen will not keep firearms out of the hands of those who would misuse them. Legislation should address the ROOT CAUSES of this problem:

Ignorance of gun safety

Ignorance of firearm laws / when use of deadly force is appropriate

Lack of firearm-related education

Lack of situational awareness training

Lack of conflict resolution training

Lack of legal means to prevent high-risk persons from accessing firearms

Lack of enforcement of existing firearm laws

Such legislation would begin to address the problem without infringing on the rights of the citizen. It would undoubtedly enable participation and support from both sides of the aisle, and from the average citizen.

 

[micdude]

Is there a house of representatives email list we can use to send out our views now that it's in the house

 

[Chess Lover]

Is there a house of representatives email list we can use to send out our views now that it's in the house

Representatives

leg.wa.gov

 

[Mad Pick]

Is there a house of representatives email list we can use to send out our views now that it's in the house

You bet:

House Democrats

[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]

House Republicans

[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]

 

[Caveman Jim]

I sent my letter of frustration, with a bit of clear logic last night. The clear logic included: criminal activity will not be limited by this law. Only law abiding citizens will listen.
And now they want us to fight evil from behind the power curve even more now. Because the ship has sailed on mags. Don't put laws on people to fill gaps where the existing laws are not being used. Enforce the ones we have. Give the police their teeth back!

It has never been about safety for the children, only control of their enemies.

 

[micdude]

You bet:

House Democrats

[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]

House Republicans

[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]

Thank you!

 

[wjv]

I pretended to be a Democrat. . .

This is a critical year for Democrats.
Polls show that Democrats will be hurt severely in the midterm elections.

Do you REALLY WANT TO CONTRIBUTED to Democrats being defeated?

Right now gun bans and magazine bans are LOW on the voter's list of priorities.

Inflation, energy prices, the war in Ukraine, getting out of COVID score much higher in the voters minds.

Even when it comes to crime. Voters are saying "ENFORCE EXISTING LAWS" Not "MAKE-UP NEW LAWS THAT ACCOMPLISH NOTHING"

VOTE NO on the magazine ban!!!

 

[Tinman357]

Just sent this to the state senators.
Don't think it will do any good, too late, but I did it anyway.

Senator;

You just motivated millions of Washington voters. Turn out has always been low, not now.

You have publicly violated your oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution.

Furthermore, you ignored the overwhelming public opposition to this bill.

Enjoy your near future unemployment.