JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
(20) "Assault weapon" means:
8 (a) Any semiautomatic pistol or semiautomatic or pump-action rifle
9 or shotgun that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine, with a
10 capacity to accept more then ten rounds of ammunition and that also
11 possesses any of the following:

Any gun can accept more than ten round magazines...the wording of this bill is so chaotic in the form of gun owners it's astonishing.
 
Ditch the high cap mags, you can't have them 'under his/her control' if you have a weapon that can accomodate them(NEW Section 2(2)(b)

The legislations states:

"Any magazine capable of use with that firearm that contains more than ten rounds of ammunition."

Notice this language - that contains - not capacity (which is used elsewhere in the legislation). I read this to mean that you can have a 30-round magazine, but it can't have 11 rounds loaded into it. If they were trying to do-away with hi-cap mags all together, they should have used "capacity to hold more than ten rounds".

Not that (any of) this makes me happy, I just don't think it means you have to throw away all of your hi-cap mags.
 
2) No person in this state shall possess or have under his or her control at one time both of the following:
(a) A semiautomatic or pump-action rifle, semiautomatic pistol, or
shotgun capable of accepting a detachable magazine; and
(b) Any magazine capable of use with that firearm that contains
more than ten rounds of ammunition.

So Wait.. Unless im stupid and am reading this wrong... does this mean you cannot for instance have your AR15 on you and your Handgun on you at the same time?
 
Anyone know what the odds of this thing passing are? Especially now that our entire country is starting to lurch to the right because other domestic issues (health care debate, bailouts, taxes, etc.?)
I'll say this, I would plan to move from Washington (if I lived there) to somewhere like Idaho or Montana (not Oregon, as it will likely follow California and Washington eventually) if something like this were to be passed. After all, what is your liberty worth?
 
never mind speculation on what chance this has of passing. Time to hit overdrive, and let these bozos, and ALL our own reps, that this is NOT acceptable and must NOT be even considered. THEN, we need to get to work to vote the four monkeys who are pushing this rape of our God-given and inalienable rights out of the Marble Zoo forever. The ONLY thing that will win the day long term is for every candidate running for public office to understand this: that anyone who threatens to curtail our Constitutional rigths will be thrown out of office, and anyone who does not pledge to support them ALL will not be voted IN to office. Until this becomes knee-jerk reaction to such folly, they will continue to press it.

For such lawmakers, they need to be sent to a "reeducaation camp", that is, the polls that will reject them. And their fate will then serve to warn others.. hands off our rights.

Funny, I'm in California just now, some things are moving me to consider moving here, but one issue that keeps coming up is their insane firearms laws. If Washington passes this hideous nonsense, it won't make much difference on that score;; I'll already BE living in an über-restrictive state, so changing to the great Kali won't be that big a deal.

No, time to "educate" these monkeys.
 
I've got Fairley, Kagi & Chase representing me - what do you think my chances are of convincing them to vote "no" on this? (ha)

I didn't move far enough away from Seattle...
 
Just e-mailed my Senator (Joe McDermott, one of the sponsors) to let him know that I disagree with his position and that he should reconsider his sponsorship. Thanks for the link twoclones.

I've written to my legislators so often lately, they have started calling me by my first name...

I urge everyone to find your State Senator here
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx
and write them opposing Senate Bill 6396
 
better than Senator Ed Murray
Representative Jamie Pedersen
Representative Frank Chopp
who rep my district.
i still wrote them anyways.
 
So Wait.. Unless im stupid and am reading this wrong... does this mean you cannot for instance have your AR15 on you and your Handgun on you at the same time?

I think it's saying that you can't have items on line a. and items on line b. You could have an ar and a pistol but as soon as you have a mag for either one your wearin yer black cowboy hat. See that "and" in there?
 
Just wrote my Representatives and I strongly urge everyone else on this forum who will be affected by this do the same. I know I don't want a sheriff walking into my home to inspect my personal possessions
 
While we are writing our own Senators, and this bill is in committee, shouldn't we be writing to the committee members as well? Let's "nip it in the bud."

Dave Workman has listed, and linked to, the committee members at the bottom of his article here:
<broken link removed>

The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Kline is chair and Kohl-Welles is a member. Other committee members are
Mike Carrell
James Hargrove
Pam Roach
Debbie Regala
Rodney Tom
Bob McCaslin

Update: I have written to ALL of the committee members asking them to "Please oppose this egregious attack on our Second Amendment Rights."
 
Last Edited:
Status

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top