• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Limits on firearms ownership

tricityguy

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, ,
imported post

In Morris said:

As an example, if you were to run my name, you would see a list of handguns that I purchased from various FFLs over the years

So, here's a question: When and how might one earn the privilege of getting his name on a special list? Over a certain quantity? Specific types of guns? I can't help but wonder if any officer pulling my record would crap himself and assume I'm a threat to society... I buy most of my guns new, so they're on file.
 

kparker

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
1,326
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
imported post

There is no special list. Every handgun purchase in WA is registered with the Dept of Licensing. If you bought only one, 5 years ago, it wil show up.

I can't imagine a long list would be a particular concern to an officer--how many handguns can you wield at one time? It's the ones they don't know about that they are at special risk from.
 

tricityguy

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, ,
imported post

Primary reason I ask, a buddy thought there were federal laws on "stockpiling weapons" ... in fact I'm positive I've seen that cited in the media when they bust into people's homes (oh, I'm sorry, they like to call them "compounds") and cart them off to a place where nobody ever hears from them again.

I was merely curious what that limit was, if it exists at all, to make damn sure I don't go near it.
 

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

tricityguy wrote:
Primary reason I ask, a buddy thought there were federal laws on "stockpiling weapons" ... in fact I'm positive I've seen that cited in the media when they bust into people's homes (oh, I'm sorry, they like to call them "compounds") and cart them off to a place where nobody ever hears from them again.

I was merely curious what that limit was, if it exists at all, to make damn sure I don't go near it.
There are none.

Buy as many legal guns as you can afford.
 

Cougar125

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
278
Location
Coupeville, WA
imported post

Dunno...only 3 of my 8 have my name on them and can be traced to me...no worries as I'm not going out and trying to break the law. I can't even get ammo for 1 of them...its friggin expensive. I'll probably refinish it and hang it on the wall.
 

Morris

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
173
Location
North of Seattlle, South of Canada, Washington, US
imported post

If my wife were to find out how many handguns were logged to me, well . . . . :)

The records are now registering new handguns in about three weeks after purchase, although this period is longer now due to the new Federal administration.

No one really cares about handguns listed to you unless it's in relationship with a crime involving violence or firearms (assault, robbery, etc.).

But the registration is there. I'm not ringing a bell for private purchase. But I do want uninformed owners to be aware that handguns they purchase at FFLs or as part of a private transfer that involves a voluntary DOL form will be registered to you and no future sales to other FFLs will expunge that purchase record. Oh, forgot, the DOL identifies the blue forms as "purchase records."
 

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,318
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
imported post

kparker wrote:
It's the ones they don't know about that they are at special risk from.
What? Are you suggesting that if the police don't know that I have a handgun then they are somehow at special risk from me? Explain please.
 

kparker

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
1,326
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
imported post

It's not that you are a greater or lesser risk, based on whether or not the officer knows you're carrying. Rather, it's a huge risk for the officer to become complacent too early in a contact because he thinks a particular person is unarmed hence "safe" .

Or something like that; I'm sure Morris or JohnnyLaw or some other actual LEO can explain it better than I can.
 

ChuckUFarley

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
256
Location
Renton, Washington, USA
imported post

tricityguy wrote:
Primary reason I ask, a buddy thought there were federal laws on "stockpiling weapons" ... in fact I'm positive I've seen that cited in the media when they bust into people's homes (oh, I'm sorry, they like to call them "compounds") and cart them off to a place where nobody ever hears from them again.

I was merely curious what that limit was, if it exists at all, to make damn sure I don't go near it.

Yeah they pulled that crap to attack WACO and Ruby Ridge.

Funny thing is it i cant find a law, many states have a law against malitias Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, 71 S. Ct. 857, 95 L. Ed. 1137 (1951), but i cannot find an actual law that says over such and such is considered stockpiling.

http://law.jrank.org/pages/10067/Second-Amendment-PRIVATE-MILITIAS.html

http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Barry1.htm
 

Morris

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
173
Location
North of Seattlle, South of Canada, Washington, US
imported post

No, good explanation from my perspective. It's like this: with open carry, I know you are armed. I know you have a small folder because the clip is visible. It's the AK in the bag with a passenger in the back of a cab that is troubling. Or the guy with the knife affixed to the inside of the collar of his jacket (so when he placed his hands on his head, he could admittedly slide his hands out, draw it and stab me - spincter check on that contact) that troubles me.

Or, assume everyone is armed until otherwise verified.
 

tricityguy

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, ,
imported post

Yeah they pulled that crap to attack WACO and Ruby Ridge.
Right, and this is the kind of crap that concerns me. Having weapons registered to me at all concerns me - not because I have anything to hide. I don't. But we've seen how far some people in government are willing to go. What happens to those records down the road? What if some anti-gun zealot takes power? I don't want my name plastered all over the place - yet it's already done.

If I recall, there was a case not too far back where a couple of young guys had a lot of high powered rifles. They'd taken pictures of themselves with them and bragged about 'em a bit online. Somehow the police got involved, even though no laws were being broken (to my knowledge), and decided to take 'em in. They showed up at one of the kids' house and when he approached the front door to open it, they just opened fire right through the door, killing him. Said they expected "heavily armed resistance" ... he was just answering the door.

It's a real concern, you know. One pisses off the wrong people down at city hall, forcing them to change their gun laws, so they pull your record and go from there. I don't need that crap.

Not that any of this will stop me from buying legal firearms and engaging in legal, polite, non-violent activism. But the thoughts are there, in the back of my mind. I didn't even think it was legal for the government to be maintaining lists of every firearm purchase we've ever made and keeping them for all eternity. Wonder what other lists these bastards have on us. I'll bet they know what brand of toilet paper I like.
 
Top