Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Very Interesting

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Very Interesting

    According to Kitsap Prosecutor Hauge, a box designed for use on the Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club, to supress the report and restrict the angle of departure from a firearm would be illegal as it is a "SUPRESSOR" 9.41.250(c). Using this narrow view and interpretation,one would be guilty of a gross misdemeanor by using ear protection while shooting.

    Hauge goes on to say "I see no harm, and much good coming from carefully crafted language allowing law-abiding citizens to posess and use firearm sound supressors. We've never, to my knowledge, encountered a crime involving a supressor and Ihave a tough time imagining how the use of one would facilitate another crime other than spy- novel assassination attempts. On the other hand, controlling the noise from otherwise lawful and safe use of firearms would address a significant problem in populated areas. I would support such legislation"

    This could be an interesting development. The ATF was questioned and said that because eit was not portable and not attached to a fire arm, it was not a supressor under federal law.

  2. #2
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    I'm all for repeal of this erroneous law against using lawfully possessed suppressors.

    Oregon seems to get along just fine.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Matt Shea 4th District Representative

    Check out his bills

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/house/Represen...ip.aspx?m=Shea

    If Kitsap County is willing to move on this then it may be possible to get traction on the State level

    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Renton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
    Check out his bills

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/house/Represen...ip.aspx?m=Shea

    If Kitsap County is willing to move on this then it may be possible to get traction on the State level

    ~Whitney
    I like your signature! Who says you can't fix stupid?!?
    Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world; it's the only thing that ever does.- Margaret Mead


    Those who will not fight for justice today will fight for their lives in the future,

    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. Benjamin Franklin

  5. #5
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
    Check out his bills

    http://www.leg.wa.gov/house/Represen...ip.aspx?m=Shea

    If Kitsap County is willing to move on this then it may be possible to get traction on the State level

    ~Whitney
    Yea, lots of sponsors on that one this time.

    I especially like HB 1030 too!

  6. #6
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    According to Kitsap Prosecutor Hauge, a box designed for use on the Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club, to supress the report and restrict the angle of departure from a firearm would be illegal as it is a "SUPRESSOR" 9.41.250(c). Using this narrow view and interpretation,one would be guilty of a gross misdemeanor by using ear protection while shooting.
    This is funny to me. Years ago I lived in Silverdale and needed to get rid of a troublesome stray dog that had killed some chickens. Shooting wasn't legal in the area I lived in so I didn't want to just go out in the yard and take a shot at it. Every evening the dog would pass through our yard just before dusk so I decided to go ahead and shoot it. To keep the noise down so the neighbors wouldn't call the sheriff I used a "Whole House Silencer". Since I knew where the dog was going through the yard, and where he stopped to "leave his mark" I set up a card table and books for a rest in the middle of the living room. The windows were the old fashioned "double hung" where you could lift the lower part and make a gap. I raised the window enough to get a good sight line. Sure enough the dog showed up, I shot, went out and cleaned up. Nobody said a word. Pretty effective considering the rifle was an old 1903 Springfield in 30/06. I guess that made the house an "illegal device". Oh, well, the house is gone and the statute of limitations has long past.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451
    Nicely done!
    The only crime is that the owner didn't have to reckon with the dog's deeds.


    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    This is funny to me. Years ago I lived in Silverdale and needed to get rid of a troublesome stray dog that had killed some chickens. Shooting wasn't legal in the area I lived in so I didn't want to just go out in the yard and take a shot at it. Every evening the dog would pass through our yard just before dusk so I decided to go ahead and shoot it. To keep the noise down so the neighbors wouldn't call the sheriff I used a "Whole House Silencer". Since I knew where the dog was going through the yard, and where he stopped to "leave his mark" I set up a card table and books for a rest in the middle of the living room. The windows were the old fashioned "double hung" where you could lift the lower part and make a gap. I raised the window enough to get a good sight line. Sure enough the dog showed up, I shot, went out and cleaned up. Nobody said a word. Pretty effective considering the rifle was an old 1903 Springfield in 30/06. I guess that made the house an "illegal device". Oh, well, the house is gone and the statute of limitations has long past.

  8. #8
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
    Nicely done!
    The only crime is that the owner didn't have to reckon with the dog's deeds.
    If I knew who owned the dog I'd have dropped the carcass off, maybe a few days after it had "ripened".
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    If I knew who owned the dog I'd have dropped the carcass off, maybe a few days after it had "ripened".
    When I lived out in farm & ranch country, we had a system for that. You gut shoot the animal, and it goes home to die.
    I can't say that'd be my choice anymore. I may have gotten soft, but I don't see why the animal has to suffer. Now if I could gut shoot the owner, it would be worth another thought....
    Oh, and I meant to ask- Did ya have some "powder perfume" around the house for a while after?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    renton, ,
    Posts
    53
    if any of you are on northwestfirearms.com, there is a gentleman on there that is lobbying to get this passed named RANB. he's been working on this for about a year and a half. he has met with a few reps and spoken with them about the bill and if the would give it a chance on the floor. so, most have been in support of it and senator kline is even puzzled about why suppressor are legal to own but not legal to shoot and MIGHT be willing to give this bill a shot (no pun intended). if you guys want to help this bill, contact ranb and he can give you more information.

    here is his contact info on northwestfirearms...
    http://www.northwestfirearms.com/for...bers/ranb.html

  11. #11
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
    When I lived out in farm & ranch country, we had a system for that. You gut shoot the animal, and it goes home to die.
    I can't say that'd be my choice anymore. I may have gotten soft, but I don't see why the animal has to suffer. Now if I could gut shoot the owner, it would be worth another thought....
    Oh, and I meant to ask- Did ya have some "powder perfume" around the house for a while after?
    Smelled great. Kind of like "The smell of Napalm in the morning", etc.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  12. #12
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
    ...as much as I approve of the change and hope HB1016 gets passed, I'd much rather see 9.41.250 say something like "only if used in the commission of a crime of violence" rather than referring to federal law. The federal law is stupid.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    [QUOTE=John Hardin;1433076]...as much as I approve of the change and hope HB1016 gets passed, I'd much rather see 9.41.250 say something like "only if used in the commission of a crime of violence" rather than referring to federal law. The federal law is stupid.[/QUOTE

    Well, write your own version......

  14. #14
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Hardin View Post
    ...as much as I approve of the change and hope HB1016 gets passed, I'd much rather see 9.41.250 say something like "only if used in the commission of a crime of violence" rather than referring to federal law. The federal law is stupid.
    Well, write your own version......
    Can we say "straight line"?

    http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/wa_gu...suppressor.txt

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    Quote Originally Posted by John Hardin View Post
    Looks good to me with one exception. I would change this ...

    (c) Uses in the purposeful or knowing commission of a crime of violence
    any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm,

    to read...
    (c) Uses in the puposeful or knowing commission of a crime, and contrivance or device, attached to a firearm
    for the purpose of supressing the report upon firing.

    without having the "attached to a firearm" still leaves the broad interpretation as used by Hauge.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    Looks good to me with one exception. I would change this ...

    (c) Uses in the purposeful or knowing commission of a crime of violence
    any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm,

    to read...
    (c) Uses in the puposeful or knowing commission of a crime, and contrivance or device, attached to a firearm
    for the purpose of supressing the report upon firing.

    without having the "attached to a firearm" still leaves the broad interpretation as used by Hauge.
    I'm confused. Are you worried that someone might commit a crime of violence and use a box to suppress the sound of the firearm? If they did, why would we care if they were prosecuted?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    Heresolong,
    Go back to my first post and read what Kitsap prosecutor gave as his interpretation of 9.41.250 (c). His interpretation of the law, as it presently stands, would make ANY device (ie. hearing muffs) a supressor. attached to the firearm or not. By requiring it to be attached to the firearm the interpretation is narrowed considerably.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    Heresolong,
    Go back to my first post and read what Kitsap prosecutor gave as his interpretation of 9.41.250 (c). His interpretation of the law, as it presently stands, would make ANY device (ie. hearing muffs) a supressor. attached to the firearm or not. By requiring it to be attached to the firearm the interpretation is narrowed considerably.
    That makes sense. But you still have to be committing a crime of violence either way. I guess that was my point. I seem to remember this same discussion a year or so ago about whether wearing earplugs at the range was a violation of this statute. It was pretty much agreed that it was so your point is well taken.
    Last edited by heresolong; 01-03-2011 at 08:41 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    without having the "attached to a firearm" still leaves the broad interpretation as used by Hauge.
    Good suggestion, thanks.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruby View Post
    I like your signature! Who says you can't fix stupid?!?
    Stupidity is like the Borg. No matter what you use to try and defeat it, it wiil adapt, overcome and if you are not careful, assimilate you. Ignorance can be cured, stupidity is permanent and contagious. Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experiece.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •