Senator Kline's reply to my e-mail on silencer use.

[sigman]

Sen Roach is a good person. I meet with her on the Hound Hunting/Bear Baiting issue way back in the day.

 

[Ranb]

Thanks. I just sent Ms. Roach an e-mail.

Senator Roach,

For the last several years I have been trying to get the law changed to allow Washington residents the right to use their legally owned sound suppressors. I met with Representative Pedersen this year in Seattle and was told that the reason the bill kept dying in committee each session was that no one told him it was a priority. I have been told by one of the bill sponsors that the bill has a chance to get a hearing next session.

If in the unlikely event that this bill makes it to the Senate, it faces an even more difficult hurdle in committee with Senator Kline. When I wrote to Senator Kline in support of bill 1604, his reply was rather bizarre. He implied that silencers were not legal for commerce (they are in WA) and that the Brady Law would allow them to be sold "no questions asked" at gun shows and make their way to the criminal underworld. He would not reply to my e-mail asking for clarification on his position.

I wrote to My Senator (Tom Sheldon) asking for his support in this matter and that he try to talk to Senator Kline about his deceptive comments, but Mr. Sheldon has not replied to my e-mails. I wrote to Senator McCaslin, the ranking minority committee member, but he said, “If Senator Kline opposes the bill, and apparently he does, the bill is dead.” It appears that Mr. McClasin also opposes bill 1604 if he is not willing to do anything to support it.

Am I correct in assuming that other Judiciary committee members are able to influence the chairman in some way to push bills they support and get them a hearing and then on to the Senate floor for debate and a vote? Surely if the chairman was as powerful as Mr. McClasin implies, then there would not be any need for a Judiciary committee, just the chairman.

Are you willing to push bill 1604 in committee and ensure it gets a hearing if it is passed by the House next session? If not, can you tell me why you oppose use of suppressors by those who pay the $200 tax and obtain ATF approval to purchase or make one?

So far, even those legislators that do not oppose the bill are unwilling to tell me why they will not actively support it, except to claim it is a hot button issue or somehow controversial. I suspect that the Senators and Representatives that make these claims do not actually support the idea of using a muffler on a gun but lack the backbone to come out and tell me.

I made a short video on DVD that describes the legalities of sound suppressor use on firearms in the United States. I would like to send you a copy. What address is best, the Olympia or District office addresses listed on your webpage?

I am discussing bill 1604 on various forums online. I would like to use our e-mails in the discussion unless you object. Thank you.

Respectfully,

Randall Bragge

Hopefully she will be much more helpful than Sheldon and McClasin. With Senators like McClasin, we will never get anything done.

Ranb

 

[Ranb]

Senator Roach will not help either. Can anyone in her district try to talk her into lending a hand?

Dear Randy,

Thank for you email. I am on the Judiciary committee and there is no way that this bill would be heard unless the plan would be along the way to amend it into something really terrible for gun owners. In a hostile legislature you are lucky when bills don't come up! You have no control over the bills once they are "in the system" and the majority party can have their way with them. Bottom line: not a good time. Leave well enough alone in this political climate,

Pam

She seems to be just like any of the other Senators, she avoids direct answers to my questions for some reason. If we can get this bill through the House unchanged, then this is evidence that the political climate is friendly enough for it to survive the Senate if someone would just give a damn. I have yet to find anyone in the Senate that does care, except for one person. The only person that cares is Kline. And he is opposed to it.

Has anyone received any opinions, pro or con from their Senators on this bill? The only opinions that matter are those that say they are for or against the bill. Anyone who says the political climate is not right and is refusing to say yes or no is blowing smoke up your ***.

Ranb

 

[smurf hunter]

Living in a district adjacent (north Auburn, kingCo. side) to Sen. Roach - I've followed her for some time. I honestly think she's telling it as (she perceives) it to be.

I read her response as - if legislation to legitimize suppressor use in WA came into public view, the sort of people who support Sen. Kline would flip out, and anti-gun momentum might build up.

 

[Ranb]

Here are the key sentences in the e-mails.

Are you willing to push bill 1604 in committee and ensure it gets a hearing if it is passed by the House next session? If not, can you tell me why you oppose use of suppressors by those who pay the $200 tax and obtain ATF approval to purchase or make one?

Leave well enough alone in this political climate

So, even if bill 1604 makes it from the House to the Senate (proving the political climate is not against it), Senator Roach still will not support the bill.

The politicians are all telling it like they see it; for most of them they see no reason to ever support this bill, not even if it passes the House. It can not get much worse.

Where was the anti-gun momentum when Hargrove sponsored a bit identical to 1604 in the Senate years ago. I was there. 200 people showed up in Olympia to tell Kline and company to stick those bills where the sun doesn't shine.

Twenty people showed up to support the various gun ban bills and made fools of themselves. They claimed gun bans in WA are a good idea because CA does the same thing, no matter if they do not prevent crime, quoting foreign suicide statistics and even one cop in uniform claiming that while they had no experience with certain rifles (ie, no crimes committed), they were still unsuitable for civilian use.

These are the fools that our Senator says she is so leery of. She just does not want to support the bill.

Ranb