Washington Washington state SB 5078 Passes Senate, goes to House

[Cerberus Group]

It is that easy. Maybe instead of buying that 50th or 100th magazine you/we/all of us put 10 or 20% of that cost into the pot for a few Pro-gun candidates to go up against the more vulnerable dems in the upcoming election. Find the best pro-gun candidates and put that money into their coffers
If we can knock a few dems out, at least some of the rest will get the message and back off. Same with donating money to fight this trash in court.
People running off to buy a hundred mags (of which 90+ will never get unwrapped) only help the anti-gunners. The panic buying is a distraction to keep our eyes off what the libs will do next.
So instead of buying a dozen mags buy 10 and put the remaining $20 or $30 into the fight to keep our rights.

How about if we quit giving in to the political garbage and just stand up and say NO to keep our rights. There...where's that EASY button...and save everyone a lot of money, instead of sending it to political candidates.

Our taxes that go to the state of Washington pay to have this done to us...stop the cash flow to Olympia.

This is no longer a court battle, as they are corrupt. Look at the SCOTUS. The Dems say...if we get our people in there, we can get things to go our way. The Reps say the same thing....and local courts are no different...it all depends on who's sitting on the bench.

As I said in the other thread...

What's that saying about insanity?
We pay for the court building, the grounds maintenance people, the clerks, and the judge. Then we pay for the person to argue against us, and we pay for the person to argue for us...absolute insanity.

To keep giving money to political candidates and even 2A groups is a lost cause...look how much 2A ground we have lost, but we're still using the same broken system.

The video posted above says it all...they keep pushing, we keep agreeing...and we're back 3 miles before we know it.

 

[The Heretic]

It is that easy. Maybe instead of buying that 50th or 100th magazine you/we/all of us put 10 or 20% of that cost into the pot for a few Pro-gun candidates to go up against the more vulnerable dems in the upcoming election. Find the best pro-gun candidates and put that money into their coffers

Who says we can't do both?

Find me a decent candidate that supports gun rights while not wanting to infringe on the rest of our rights at the same time, and who stands a decent chance of making a good run at the office.

 

[Triton900]

It's confusing how this reads...

Does this mean we can still USE/carry our STANDARD ("high capacity") magazines if we owned them prior to the introduction of this BS and can prove such?

I'm going to own what I own and have a right to own but...I am also looking at this from the perspective of ranges. training, classes etc? What about events? How will this affect IDPA, ASI, USPSA etc?

I know ranges like Cerberus dont give two bubblegums about these BS laws (which is awesome) but for ranges in the cities, how will they go about "enforcing" this crap? I worked as an RSO for a short while, I could not imagine checking every single persons magazines as they come in.

In the end, personally, I will not comply but that said... what will happen with our local downtown ranges?

 

[The Heretic]

Does this mean we can still USE/carry our STANDARD ("high capacity") magazines if we owned them prior to the introduction of this BS and can prove such?

How could this (proof) be done? Almost nobody keeps receipts for mags, and how about when you buy them privately? And who is to say what mag goes with which receipt?

 

[Triton900]

How could this (proof) be done? Almost nobody keeps receipts for mags, and how about when you buy them privately? And who is to say what mag goes with which receipt?

I agree completely, it's ridiculous.

 

[monkeybutler]

Buy mags now - wherever you live. This is what is coming down the line, especially on the left coast.

I would if I did not already have so many.... but I might buy some extra springs just to be ridiculously redundant.

 

[srxfan]

Does this mean we can still USE/carry our STANDARD ("high capacity") magazines if we owned them prior to the introduction of this BS and can prove such?

I'm going to own what I own and have a right to own but...I am also looking at this from the perspective of ranges. training, classes etc? What about events? How will this affect IDPA, ASI, USPSA etc?

The original and substitute text had impractical requirements on use, and carve-outs for competition. (carry would be 10-rd max, std capacity OK at ranges/competitions).

The amended substitute text (which is what was passed by the WA Senate) removes these requirements - if you have a std cap mag, you can use it as you will.

How could this (proof) be done? Almost nobody keeps receipts for mags, and how about when you buy them privately? And who is to say what mag goes with which receipt?

The original/substitute text banned possession and to prove a grandfathered mag, it required a picture with the magazine as proof that you owned it before the cutoff date. Obviously very game-able and impractical as proof.

The amended substitute text (which is what was passed by the WA Senate) removes this requirement and goes even further by not banning possession at all, so there is no need to prove you bought it beforehand. The text instead bans sale/distribution/manufacturing/importation, and not outright possession.

 

[Alexx1401]

Well this sounds like a broken record but, only one thing will "fix this". Gun owners voting well. Yes this will pass, Jay will sign it. MANY gun owners will go years and never know it went in. When they find out they will get angry then. If a LOT of law makers who vote for this get kicked to the curb the law can and will be changed. Depending on the courts to "fix this" is a poor way to go. Even if the courts beat it back the law makers if kept in office will do it again. There is only one way to make this better.

 

[Triton900]

Still confused if being "grandfathered in" means we can continue to run our STANDARD capacity mags? Or does it mean, we can own them but not use them?

 

[slimmer13]

Still confused if being "grandfathered in" means we can continue to run our STANDARD capacity mags? Or does it mean, we can own them but not use them?

It still has to run through the house, where amendments may be made, then re-approved by the senate, then approved by the house. We don't really know anything yet.

 

[Triton900]

It still has to run through the house, where amendments may be made, then re-approved by the senate, then approved by the house. We don't really know anything yet.

Gotcha, thank you.

 

[salmon creek gary]

The sorry thing is, setting a first version limit of seventeen ounds probably relieved the pro-gun campaign enough to ease pressure on the bastids. Or, our emails and calls focused on the dang idiotic photo proof instead of the limited size part of their dirty work.

I suspect that any easing of pressure would be interpreted as pro-gun folks seeming OK with the concept of a mag limit. I'm more certain, though, that the duplicitous plan all along was to camouflage their real intent by talking about a seventeen round limit, figuring that would keep us off their backs until they could - at the last moment - scratch out the "seventeen" and write in a "ten".

 

[Alexx1401]

The sorry thing is, setting a first version limit of seventeen ounds probably relieved the pro-gun campaign enough to ease pressure on the bastids. Or, our emails and calls focused on the dang idiotic photo proof instead of the limited size part of their dirty work.

I suspect that any easing of pressure would be interpreted as pro-gun folks seeming OK with the concept of a mag limit. I'm more certain, though, that the duplicitous plan all along was to camouflage their real intent by talking about a seventeen round limit, figuring that would keep us off their backs until they could - at the last moment - scratch out the "seventeen" and write in a "ten".

Compromise has almost never gone any other way than we lose again. Yet it works because it works. Some version of this will of course pass. Years from now we will read gun owner who just found out the law went in and boy are they mad
When they are asked where were you years ago when this passed? Who did you vote for? They will change the subject and throw out the usual voting makes no difference and all. I keep hoping people will wake up. Maybe they will but it seems to take a hell of a lot to get that to happen

 

[Gunbuggy]

So does this mean I can still carry standard capacity? I keep looking in there to see about carrying or having it on your possession or loaded at home and I come up dry

 

[Alexx1401]

So does this mean I can still carry standard capacity? I keep looking in there to see about carrying or having it on your possession or loaded at home and I come up dry

No one can yet answer anything. This is not on the books yet. Some version of it is going to pass and of course Jay will sign in. Until it actually goes in though no one can say what the finally product will be.

 

[Ducati_Meister]

Go figure, as I expected, LE/Government gets an exemption clause...further shifting the power balance in the government's favor. Of course it's what the left wants as a part of their power base over the people. The government is supposed to fear the people in a free society, not the other way around.

 

[shibbershabber]

Go figure, as I expected, LE/Government gets an exemption clause...further shifting the power balance in the government's favor. Of course it's what the left wants as a part of their power base over the people. The government is supposed to fear the people in a free society, not the other way around.

Doesnt matter what our capacity is vs the Gov.

Not like anyone is going to rise up and use them

 

[Gunbuggy]

No one can yet answer anything. This is not on the books yet. Some version of it is going to pass and of course Jay will sign in. Until it actually goes in though no one can say what the finally product will be.

Thanks for the response. Yeah I know for now nothing is decided but I was reading the linked amendment in the posts on the first page and it seems like they did away with all that storing unloaded and only for use at licensed ranges or whatever they said

 

[GWS]

I need a civics lesson here
If the House puts in amendments that are unacceptable to the Senate i.e. Unresolvable
Let's say for the sake of this lesson only The house only will ban magazines that hold over 100 rounds while the Senate want 10 rounds and above banned
Does that kill the bill if they can't sort it out?

 

[The Heretic]

The original and substitute text had impractical requirements on use, and carve-outs for competition. (carry would be 10-rd max, std capacity OK at ranges/competitions).

The amended substitute text (which is what was passed by the WA Senate) removes these requirements - if you have a std cap mag, you can use it as you will.


The original/substitute text banned possession and to prove a grandfathered mag, it required a picture with the magazine as proof that you owned it before the cutoff date. Obviously very game-able and impractical as proof.

The amended substitute text (which is what was passed by the WA Senate) removes this requirement and goes even further by not banning possession at all, so there is no need to prove you bought it beforehand. The text instead bans sale/distribution/manufacturing/importation, and not outright possession.

And still totally unenforceable with regards to importation.

The only way this could be enforced is if there was some mag that has some discernable aspect to it such that it could be proven to have not existed/manufactured before the law went into effect.