Washington WA - House Bill 1240 - Assault Weapon Ban - Legislative updates

[Nosferatu]

I thought the resident ammendment make it in (to align with the mag ban policy), but it was the military exemption one that didn't(?) I could be wrong.

Wrong I am.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Question about the subject bill, now law: I'm a WA resident and let's say I happen to own an AR15, I know that's grandfathered. Now lets say I leave WA and take up residence in another state, live there for a year or so and decide I prefer rain over sunshine, I decide to move back to WA. Is the AR15 still grandfathered, or am I importing?

You're exercising your rights affirmed in the constitution. Why would it be anyone else's business but your own (assuming you are not being brain dead and advertising to everyone "look at me, I'm bringing my AR into the state" )

 

[bikemutt]

You're exercising your rights affirmed in the constitution. Why would it be anyone else's business but your own (assuming you are not being brain dead and advertising to everyone "look at me, I'm bringing my AR into the state" )

Hint: It's a hypothetical question, nothing more.

 

[Yarome]

Wrong you are. The D's voted the amendment down.

Am I? Dated 04/24 and effective 04/25.

 

[kopcicle]

reading comprehension for the win.

 

[Nosferatu]

Am I? Dated 04/24 and effective 04/25.

View attachment 1412541

Well crap, I guess I sit corrected. I guess I'm not a felon when I come back home.

 

[Jay Walk]

Another "best way to comply" thread.

 

[bikemutt]

Well crap, I guess I sit corrected. I guess I'm not a felon when I come back

You should be OK regardless:

A violation of these restrictions is classified as a gross misdemeanor.

 

[Yarome]

reading comprehension for the win.

To be fair. Those ammendments where hotly debated and back and forth. I wasn't sure it made it in either until reading.

They certainly don't make following their laws easy.

 

[bradsteen]

Question about the subject bill, now law: I'm a WA resident and let's say I happen to own an AR15, I know that's grandfathered. Now lets say I leave WA and take up residence in another state, live there for a year or so and decide I prefer rain over sunshine, I decide to move back to WA. Is the AR15 still grandfathered, or am I importing?

Or you could think of it as Schrodinger's AR... it is both here and not here at the same time. Once you close the safe door, nobody can say for certain. Except you, that is.

 

[kopcicle]

To be fair. Those ammendments where hotly debated and back and forth. I wasn't sure it made it in either until reading.

They certainly don't make following their laws easy.

no argument here

 

[micdude]

I agree to an extent and might have mispoke.. or at least didn't make it very clear. "You" know if your firearm is legal or not, but that doesn't mean that everyone around you knows that. If it "appears" to be what they now know to be "illegal" won't stop the ninny's from reporting it and bringing you under LE scrutiny.

What I think you missedd In the context of the discussion above though... the "assumption" was that we were taking about "now illegal" firearms and what LE would or would not do to enforce it. Not, what is LE going to do to enforce unconstitutional laws agiainst legal firearms. That would be utterly pointless... as would any sheriff making any statement to begin with. Right(?)

At the minimum you will loose your firearm because he/she cop will confiscate it for evidence. At the worst you will go to jail because the bill is so poorly written that's it's hard to prove when that firearm was purchased. They also would serve you with a search warrant and find out what else you have they can charge you with and maybe make an example out of you.
Sending you to the pound you in the butt prison for years, I don't see this far from being real.

 

[Diamondback]

They certainly don't make following their laws easy.

By design... the Deep State's goal at both Federal and State levels is to be able to felonize any individual who enters its crosshairs at will by hook or crook, no matter how absurd the charge (see: "tearing a ag off a pillow" for example).

Te average person unwittingly commits three Federal felonies a day... you DON'T honestly think that's by accident, do you? No, like Orwell (IIRC) wrote "when you don't have enough criminals you MAKE some."

 

[Diamondback]

Will he roll this into another White House bid?

Sure as stink on dogcrap. My bet is he's gonna try to replace the Vice Prostitute, then use the 25A to stick a shiv in Biden once they win and he's taken the oath. He's not going to particularly worry about needing a VP because he's arrogant enough that as soon as he gets to 1600 he'll start lookngi for end-runs on the 22nd to make himself Dicktator-for-Life just like he has here in WA.

 

[Alexx1401]

If that's accurate then it's the rifle itself that matters, not the owner.

So, lets say it's like I asked about but, I rent a secure storage locker, or maybe a bank safety deposit box in WA, park the rifle, and leave WA for a year or so. Change my mind, move back to WA, smile at the bank clerk and retrieve my rifle, still importing?

Are you going to wait till someone here gives the answer you want then use that? If you end up in front of a black robe going to show them a print out of what you were told here?

 

[bikemutt]

Are you going to wait till someone here gives the answer you want then use that? If you end up in front of a black robe going to show them a print out of what you were told here?

Hypothetical questions serve a purpose, there's nothing more to it.

 

[Dieselchessy]

Constitutional Rights-

All persons are EQUAL under the Constitution

All persons except for you because you have more GUNS than I do, so you have more rights under the 2a and Section 1 Article 25 than me? seems like someone's rights are infringed here.

Article 1, section 24?

 

[GWS]

Read back.

No one is disputing that. Hooyah keeps bringing it up, but as I keep saying, it doesn't have anything to do the discussion that was about Sheriff's offices statements regarding the fact that they would not enforce the unconstitutional laws.

Seeing how it would be pretty foolish to talk about enforcement of laws agianst legal firearms... logic should dictate that the discussion was referring to potential infractions and enforcement of the new laws, right???

If you were only referring to the comment about being reported at a range... they yeah. Today they are legal and it's safe to assume any and all are currently grandfathered. Speaking of the future though, that may not always be the case, and even still, legal or not, that doesnt stop some busybody from reporting you anyway. It doesn't have to be illegal for the authoraties to jam you up. Even if that only means wasting hours out of your day answering questions and proving your firearms is in fact legal.

Yeah, I was referring to the bit about waving one's assault weapon at the range, hence my bolding and underlining your comment in the my quoting of your post.

Look, in 2001, when SB23 went into effect, people in California were sweating the same things 20+ years ago that you're worrying about now and they never happened. Cops weren't sweating people for having assault weapons that frightened some ninny at the range, with the only notable exception being some poor guy in Santa Rosa (IIRC) getting busted 3 times for having an M1A, which wasn't even banned. It got sorted out in the guy's favor.
The only people who got busted for having an assault weapon were prohibited persons. There were no raids at public ranges or BLM/ Forest Service shooting places.
The best advice in how to live with the assault weapon ban is from a cop I know back in the PRK :
Act the same way you did before the ban.
AND
Don't be stupid

 

[Yarome]

Yeah, I was referring to the bit about waving one's assault weapon at the range, hence my bolding and underlining your comment in the my quoting of your post.

Look, in 2001, when SB23 went into effect, people in California were sweating the same things 20+ years ago that you're worrying about now and they never happened. Cops weren't sweating people for having assault weapons that frightened some ninny at the range, with the only notable exception being some poor guy in Santa Rosa (IIRC) getting busted 3 times for having an M1A, which wasn't even banned. It got sorted out in the guy's favor.
The only people who got busted for having an assault weapon were prohibited persons. There were no raids at public ranges or BLM/ Forest Service shooting places.
The best advice in how to live with the assault weapon ban is from a cop I know back in the PRK :
Act the same way you did before the ban.
AND
Don't be stupid

That does make a good argument that no one should ever sweat any laws that infringe on our rights. Leave the lawmakers alone and let them do what they do. Just do as you did before, don't be stupid, and the laws will never affect you.

The only flaw in that would be if WA state (or Kalifederation) started actively enforcing the laws that have already granted them the power to do so, but.... it's probably okay. Just because there are laws on the books that might make an otherwise law abiding person a criminal, we can certainly trust that they won't actually ever use them... unless a person really steps out of line and does something they "really" don't like, right(?)

Sorry. I didn't see the underlined part. It was below the "click to expand" option and I didn't click to expand to re-read my own post. If you're only responding to a select portion though it might help to only repost that portion for better visibility and context(?)

 

[Diamondback]

Just because there are laws on the books that might make an otherwise law abiding person a criminal, we can certainly trust that they won't actually ever use them... unless a person really steps out of line and does something they "really" don't like, right(?)

Or you just happen to find yourself personally crossthreaded with someone in power...