JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
At a price that doesn't make you shoot coffee out of your nose.
Totally agree. Saw a gun you can buy new for $999 being sold used for $1900. Another shotgun that is $462 new being sold used for $800. I don't get it why in the world would they expect someone pay up to twice as much for a used gun vs new?
 
Totally agree. Saw a gun you can buy new for $999 being sold used for $1900. Another shotgun that is $462 new being sold used for $800. I don't get it why in the world would they expect someone pay up to twice as much for a used gun vs new?
tumblr_m7t6p1P7MI1rcszs4o1_500.jpeg.jpg
 
E
Looks like it's Dimke unfortunately.

View attachment 1413087
I don't know about that judge but it seems like they only come in 2 flavors: (1) like Benitez and Raschio who know about guns and understand there is a need for them, (2) those that don't know about guns and can't understand why we even need them (f.e. Immergut in OR). If this judge is part of that second group, that's very bad for that particular suit. Fortunately there are 2 more active suits at this point though. To me really the type of judge in these cases is everything. Nothing else matters it seems.
 
E

I don't know about that judge but it seems like they only come in 2 flavors: (1) like Benitez and Raschio who know about guns and understand there is a need for them, (2) those that don't know about guns and can't understand why we even need them (f.e. Immergut in OR). If this judge is part of that second group, that's very bad for that particular suit. Fortunately there are 2 more active suits at this point though. To me really the type of judge in these cases is everything. Nothing else matters it seems.
Dimke is the judge that was supposed to rule on an injunction for the Washington magazine ban in December.
 
Mods/Admin, not really cross posting but make it disappear if need be...

I've been posting on political shiznit for too long. It's getting old.
Anyone want to join me over here to discuss desecration/modification of lever rifles?

 
So, show up in Washington and borrow a weapon while here?

Longer answer...
1639 gets in the way depending on how loan, lend, possession, and ultimately intent is defined.

ref:

~snip
A transfer between immediate family members, which for this subsection shall be limited to spouses, domestic partners, parents, parents-in-law, children, siblings, siblings-in-law, grandparents, 20 grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles, that is a bona fide gift or loan; (b) The sale or transfer of an antique firearm; (c) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if such transfer is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to the person to whom the firearm is transferred if: (i) The temporary transfer only lasts as long as immediately necessary to prevent such imminent death or great bodily harm; and (ii) The person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; (d) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if: (i) The transfer is intended to prevent suicide or self-inflicted great bodily harm; (ii) the transfer lasts only as long as reasonably necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm; and (iii) the firearm is not utilized by the transferee for any purpose for the duration of the temporary transfer; ~snip

Does anyone feel or think that the AG would give a pass on the loan or lending of a firearm on these definitions for the use of a visiting competitor in a firearms match of any kind within the state of Washington?

I am not a lawyer. This is purely conjecture. This has come up exhaustively before.
This is not even remotely subjective, let alone objective opinion. This is voiced as more of a paranoid concern in light of Washington State government overreach.
 
Last Edited:
Does anyone feel or think that the AG would give a pass on the loan or lending of a firearm on these definitions for the use of a visiting competitor in a firearms match
That's a hard negative.

If you knew Bob Ferguson like we know Bob Furguson. There is no way in the world he would give anyone a pass. He's been behind all this since the 2019 80% lower ban, into the 2022 magazine ban and now the 1240, which defies categorization in language suitable for broadcast on public airwaves. These are HIS laws.
 

Upcoming Events

Rifle Mechanics
Sweet Home, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors May 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Handgun Self Defense Fundamentals
Sweet Home, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top