Washington Video on transporting high-capacity magazines in/out of WA State on/after July 1, 2022

[sobo]

What if I cross the international date line and then come back?

You've been listening to too much George Carlin, haven't you?

 

[RX-79G]

I disagree with him on that interpretation.

Yeah, I don't think the lawyer in the video has his head on straight, because he's saying that an Idaho resident can temporarily bring a hi-cap mag into Washington for the day, regardless of whether it is grandfathered or not. And that would be insane given that the law is there to prevent mass shootings with hi-cap mags. "Hey, someone shot up a school!" "It's okay, they're from Idaho."

The law doesn't mention residency, it only talks about being in the state or not being in the state. If a mag is here for 10 minutes, it has been "imported". The only way to "un-import" it is to take it out of state and then sell it to a different owner.

 

[Koda]

Strictly by the law's own definition of "import", yes, the law does allow grandfathered mags to enter the state.

Still disagree. I dont see anywhere in the import exception it allows non resident mags to be grandfathered.

 

[Koda]

There is no requirement for residency (or non-residency, for that matter) in the law. Therefore, it doesn't matter if you're a resident of WA or not. As long as you bring in the mags prior to June 30, 2022, they are grandfathered and you can bring them back to WA after that date, since they do not meet the law's definition of "import". Residency has nothing to do with it, since it is expressly not mentioned in the law.

This doesnt make sensee to me because there is no way you could prove that you had at some point in time prior to June brought your mags into the state.

 

[sobo]

Per the vid by the 2A lawyer, you are not importing if you take the mags into the state and then remove them from the state.

By the same logic (IMO - I am not a lawyer), a non-resident taking mags into the state before the ban is in effect, then removing them before the ban is in effect, would probably not make it legal for a non-resident to later take those same mags into the state after the ban went into effect, even if the person intended to immigrate into the state and become a resident.

I think in that case, if you intend to become a resident of WA state, it would be best to immigrate into the state before the ban went into effect, or at least move the mags into the state before the ban went into effect and then left in WA state until after the ban went into effect? They would somehow have to stay in possession of the owner, not in possession of someone else, as the law does not allow for transfer of the mags.

All that said, as noted, enforcement will most likely be non-existent. But the problem would be if you became a resident of WA state well after (e.g., years later) the ban went into effect; it could be argued in court that you brought the mags in after the ban since you were not a resident before the ban.

Nothing in the law speaks to residency or non-residency.
People are arguing "what if" scenarios based off something that isn't even in the law.
That's not how "law" works...

 

[sobo]

Still disagree. I dont see anywhere in the import exception it allows non resident mags to be grandfathered.

Again, the law makes no mention of residency or non-residency. You can't be prosecuted for something absent from a law.

 

[sobo]

This doesnt make sensee to me because there is no way you could prove that you had at some point in time prior to June brought your mags into the state.

And you're precisely correct why it makes no sense to you, and that's exactly why this is a bullshiit and unenforceable law.
The law makes no sense in what it purports to prevent, nor will it prevent that thing from happening.

 

[Koda]

Again, the law makes no mention of residency or non-residency. You can't be prosecuted for something absent from a law.

Redidency doesnt matter, the only exception in the law to importing is if you leave the state you can return with the same mags you left with.
Thats it.
Everything else is importing, per the law.

 

[Koda]

And you're precisely correct why the it makes no sense to you, and that's exactly why this is a bullshiit and unenforceable law.
The law makes no sense in what is purported to prevent, nor will it prevent that thing from happening.

I agree its bullbubblegum but it is enforcable....
If a visitor lawfully defends themselves they can still be charged with importing the mag they used. Plus, id easily guess a prosecutor would suggest your illegal mag is evidence you werent legal in using it....

 

[User 1234]

This is the same lawyer who, before the recent bills passed, said polymer 80 frames were illegal in Washington but metal 80% frames were legal. As long as "detection devices commonly used at airports" can detect a polymer handgun frame (without the slide) then it wasn't illegal. Otherwise Glocks would also have been illegal as "undetectable" firearms too. It is a moot point now for most people who didn't finish an 80% in 2019.

I do not accept those videos at face value, in my personal opinion. I'd want to see more "show your math" foundation for each conclusion first.

 

[RX-79G]

Redidency doesnt matter, the only exception in the law to importing is if you leave the state you can return with the same mags you left with.
Thats it.
Everything else is importing, per the law.

You are adding a new definition of "import", where nothing is imported unless it is the act of a resident.

Which would mean that a non-resident could bring hi-caps into the state as long as they don't stay. Do you really think that was the intent of the law.

Either "import" means that you brought something in, or it means that a resident brought something in, only. The law defines import, but never says that it is for residents, only. Therefore it applies to everyone. And if it applies to everyone, that would mean grandfathering applies to everyone, too.

This doesnt make sensee to me because there is no way you could prove that you had at some point in time prior to June brought your mags into the state.

Who says you have to prove that something is legal? That isn't the way laws work. As long as there isn't evidence that you did something illegal, you can't be charged. But if you get caught selling drugs and you have a post 2022 date coded mag in your possession when they search your car, you'll be charged at that time. Which is the way laws tend to work.

 

[Koda]

Who says you have to prove that something is legal?

I didnt say that....

 

[User 1234]

You are adding a new definition of "import", where nothing is imported unless it is the act of a resident.

Which would mean that a non-resident could bring hi-caps into the state as long as they don't stay. Do you really think that was the intent of the law.

Either "import" means that you brought something in, or it means that a resident brought something in, only. The law defines import, but never says that it is for residents, only. Therefore it applies to everyone. And if it applies to everyone, that would mean grandfathering applies to everyone, too.


Who says you have to prove that something is legal? That isn't the way laws work. As long as there isn't evidence that you did something illegal, you can't be charged. But if you get caught selling drugs and you have a post 2022 date coded mag in your possession when they search your car, you'll be charged at that time. Which is the way laws tend to work.

Legislatures make mistakes when writing laws all the time. Or the sponsor's favorite portions get negotiated out before it is passed. Sometimes courts will salvage a poorly written law but often they won't, and will force the legislature to fix its own oversights.

 

[RX-79G]

I didnt say that....

Yeah, you said "This doesnt make sensee to me because there is no way you could prove that you had at some point in time prior to June brought your mags into the state."

 

[sobo]

Redidency doesnt matter, the only exception in the law to importing is if you leave the state you can return with the same mags you left with.
Thats it.
Everything else is importing, per the law.

Correct, residency doesn't matter. Glad we finally got that out of the way.

And if you have the mags in WA before the effective date, and leave with them, then you can legally come back into WA with those same magazines (and no others over 10 rounds) and still be within the letter of the law. You did not "import" anything, since those magazines were already grandfathered by mere possession inside the territorial limits of the state of Washington prior to the effective date of the law. That's what the law says about "import".

 

[RX-79G]

Legislatures make mistakes when writing laws all the time. Or the sponsor's favorite portions get negotiated out before it is passed. Sometimes courts will salvage a poorly written law but often they won't, and will force the legislature to fix its own oversights.

100% true. But since there is no mention of residency as a required portion of the definition of "import", it is pretty safe to say that the bill means what it says - bringing a mag into the state by anyone is importing it.

 

[User 1234]

100% true. But since there is no mention of residency as a required portion of the definition of "import", it is pretty safe to say that the bill means what it says - bringing a mag into the state by anyone is importing it.

Unless that magazine had been inside WA before July 1st and brought back to WA after July 1st by the same owner.

 

[sobo]

I agree its bullbubblegum but it is enforcable....
If a visitor lawfully defends themselves they can still be charged with importing the mag they used. Plus, id easily guess a prosecutor would suggest your illegal mag is evidence you werent legal in using it....

The visitor may be charged with importation, but as @RX-79G and I have discussed previously, the prosecutor would be hard-pressed to prove importation and that you didn't have the mag(s) in WA prior to the effective date of the law (absent any post-effective date stamp on the mag). In effect, the prosecution would be trying to prove a negative. As we have both said, one doesn't have to prove that one is acting within the law. The prosecution has to prove that you're not.

 

[Koda]

Correct, residency doesn't matter. Glad we finally got that out of the way.

And if you have the mags in WA before the effective date, and leave with them, then you can legally come back into WA with those same magazines (and no others over 10 rounds) and still be within the letter of the law. You did not "import" anything, since those magazines were already grandfathered by mere possession inside the territorial limits of the state of Washington prior to the effective date of the law. That's what the law says about "import".

i dont read where it says that anywhere in the law.

 

[sobo]

Legislatures make mistakes when writing laws all the time. Or the sponsor's favorite portions get negotiated out before it is passed. Sometimes courts will salvage a poorly written law but often they won't, and will force the legislature to fix its own oversights.

Which is what will ultimately happen with this poorly conceived and even more poorly written law.
But I suspect that the Legislature's remedy for this BS law will be just to totally ban "hi-cap" mags and demand their confiscation.
When that happens, which it eventually will, then we will see whether there is compliance or refusal.