Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: House Bill 1508

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

    House Bill 1508

    Something good for a change

    This Thursday, January 12, at 10 am in Olympia is a hearing for a Range Protection Bill. The hearing will be held at before the House Judiciary Committee at the state capitol campus. The John L. O'Brian building in House Hearing Room A at 10am. The Judiciary Committee agenda can be found here. A copy of House Bill 1508 can be read by clicking here. Plan to attend if you can.

    Over the last 18 years, there have been 2 similiar bills passed by the legislature but vetoed by the Gov. There were not enough votes to over ride the veto.


    H-1085.1 _____________________________________________
    HOUSE BILL 1508
    _____________________________________________
    State of Washington 62nd Legislature 2011 Regular Session
    By Representatives Takko, Probst, and Van De Wege
    Read first time 01/24/11. Referred to Committee on Judiciary.
    1 AN ACT Relating to protecting sport shooting ranges; adding a new
    2 section to chapter 9.41 RCW; creating a new section; and declaring an
    3 emergency.
    4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
    5 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The legislature finds that sport shooting
    6 ranges in this state offer valuable hunter and firearm safety training,
    7 offer legitimate and important forms of recreation to the general
    8 public, and provide the opportunity for many law enforcement agencies
    9 to maintain necessary firearms skills efficiently and at little or no
    10 cost. The continued existence and viability of sport shooting ranges
    11 is impacted by burdensome retroactive regulation and lawsuits, thereby
    12 potentially threatening the availability of low-cost firearms training
    13 to some local law enforcement agencies, as well as hunter and firearms
    14 safety training and recreation to the general public.
    15 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW
    16 to read as follows:
    17 (1)(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who
    18 operates or uses a sport shooting range in this state shall not be
    p. 1 HB 1508
    1 subject to civil liability or criminal prosecution in any matter
    2 relating to noise or noise pollution resulting from the operation or
    3 use of the range if the range is in compliance with any noise control
    4 laws or ordinances that applied to the range and its operation at the
    5 date of construction or initial operation of the range.
    6 (b) A person who operates or uses a sport shooting range is not
    7 subject to an action for nuisance, and a court of the state shall not
    8 enjoin the use or operation of a range on the basis of noise or noise
    9 pollution, if the range is in compliance with any noise control laws or
    10 ordinances that applied to the range and its operation at the date of
    11 construction or initial operation of the range.
    12 (c) Rules adopted by any state department or agency for limiting
    13 levels of noise in terms of decibel level that may occur in the outdoor
    14 atmosphere do not apply to a sport shooting range exempted from
    15 liability under this section.
    16 (2) A person who acquires title to or who owns real property
    17 adversely affected by the use of property with a permanently located
    18 and improved sport shooting range shall not maintain a nuisance action
    19 against the person who owns the range to restrain, enjoin, or impede
    20 the use of the range where there has not been a substantial change in
    21 the nature of the use of the range. This subsection does not prohibit
    22 actions for negligence or recklessness in the operation of the range or
    23 by a person using the range.
    24 (3) A sport shooting range that is operated and is not in violation
    25 of existing law at the time of the enactment of an ordinance must be
    26 permitted to continue in operation even if the operation of the sport
    27 shooting range at a later date does not conform to the new ordinance or
    28 an amendment to an existing ordinance.
    29 (4) A person who participates in sport shooting at a sport shooting
    30 range accepts the risks associated with the sport to the extent the
    31 risks are obvious and inherent. Those risks include, but are not
    32 limited to, injuries that may result from noise, discharge of a
    33 projectile or shot, malfunction of sport shooting equipment not owned
    34 by the shooting range, natural variations in terrain, surface or
    35 subsurface snow or ice conditions, bare spots, rocks, trees, and other
    36 forms of natural growth or debris.
    37 (5) Except as otherwise provided in this section, this section does
    HB 1508 p. 2
    1 not prohibit a local government from regulating the location and
    2 construction of a sport shooting range after the effective date of this
    3 section.
    4 (6) As used in this section:
    5 (a) "Local government" means a county, city, or town.
    6 (b) "Person" means an individual, proprietorship, partnership,
    7 corporation, club, or other legal entity.
    8 (c) "Sport shooting range" or "range" means an area designed and
    9 operated for the use of rifles, shotguns, pistols, silhouettes, skeet,
    10 trap, black powder, or any other similar sport shooting.
    11 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. This act is necessary for the immediate
    12 preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the
    13 state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect
    14 immediately.
    --- END ---
    p.
    Last edited by Trigger Dr; 01-08-2012 at 04:37 PM.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    I will be attending this hearing and hoping to speak as the GM of a shooting range.
    Live Free or Die!

  3. #3
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043

    Thumbs up

    Another small but positive step forward.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    Over the past 18 years there have been 2 similiar bills passed by the legislature but vetoed by the Gov. There were not enough votes to override the Gov's veto.

  5. #5
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    Over the past 18 years there have been 2 similiar bills passed by the legislature but vetoed by the Gov. There were not enough votes to override the Gov's veto.
    Yes, but shes not looking to get re-elected by her liberal base this time.

  6. #6
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    There is hope, this Gov did sign the supressor bill.

  7. #7
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by hermannr View Post
    There is hope, this Gov did sign the supressor bill.
    I can't lie, that surprised me.

  8. #8
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by gsx1138 View Post
    I can't lie, that surprised me.
    Be careful in understanding her reasoning for doing so. It wasn't an altruistic nod to the citizenry representing her trust in its ability to handle the responsibility. There were law enforcement considerations involved in how it affected their use of the devices on the same level as the rest of us.

    If it hadn't been for the LE use issues involved, it would not have passed. IMHO
    Last edited by FMCDH; 01-11-2012 at 07:45 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member fire suppressor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Kitsap County
    Posts
    872
    Sounds good to me another step in the right direction
    "Fight like you train, train like you fight"

  10. #10
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819
    I attended the hearing with Nick this morning and my impression was very positive.Even some enforcemnt officers from the fish and wildlife spoke in behalf of this bill.All together the room was pretty full and we estimate about 2 to 1 in favor. Nick did a good job in his presentation although they were limited to about 90 seconds.These are the sort of things we need to be showing up at as opposed to anti rallys that did not accomplish anything.I observed that Nick and I were the only ones there.There were alot of folks from ranges and other gun groups however.

    On a side note I spoke to a reporter and cameraman from CNN that were actually there covering another hearing.The reporter was from DC and had followed me into the hearing room.I was OC. He said in amazment that he watched me walk by 3 state patrol officers and nothing was said.One did say good morning.This reporter was shaking his head in surprise that we could do that here in the capital no less .He was also surprised we didn't have pat downs and metal detectors .He said somehting about the swat team if you did that there.Anyway Nick came up as well to talk with them and filled them in a little on Wa. gun rights and I think they had a different perspective on Wa. gun owners and the rights we still have.
    Last edited by DEROS72; 01-12-2012 at 08:57 PM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by DEROS72 View Post
    I attended the hearing with Nick this morning and my impression was very positive.Even some enforcemnt officers from the fish and wildlife spoke in behalf of this bill.All together the room was pretty full and we estimate about 2 to 1 in favor. Nick did a good job in his presentation although they were limited to about 90 seconds.These are the sort of things we need to be showing up at as opposed to anti rallys that did not accomplish anything.I observed that Nick and I were the only ones there.There were alot of folks from ranges and other gun groups however.

    On a side note I spoke to a reporter and cameraman from CNN that were actually there covering another hearing.The reporter was from DC and had followed me into the hearing room.I was OC. He said in amazment that he watched me walk by 3 state patrol officers and nothing was said.One did say good morning.This reporter was shaking his head in surprise that we could do that here in the capital no less .He was also surprised we didn't have pat downs and metal detectors .He said somehting about the swat team if you did that there.Anyway Nick came up as well to talk with them and filled them in a little on Wa. gun rights and I think they had a different perspective on Wa. gun owners and the rights we still have.
    That sounds really cool. I would imagine you guys really helped by being there.
    FMCDH mentioned something about law enforcement using suppressors. I wasn't aware police used them. I thought that was just a recreational shooting/military thing.
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666
    Today's testimony. Starts at about the 18 minute mark. My testimony is at 37:10 minute mark

    http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=...=946&stop=3908

    http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=...&stop=3908
    Live Free or Die!

  13. #13
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819
    I was sitting right behind the table there but did not speak I thought the others had it covered very well and at that point anything I said would have been redundant.

  14. #14
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by decklin View Post
    That sounds really cool. I would imagine you guys really helped by being there.
    FMCDH mentioned something about law enforcement using suppressors. I wasn't aware police used them. I thought that was just a recreational shooting/military thing.
    Here is the original bill....
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...1016#documents

    Read the House report...it contains the Law Enforcement interest in the bill.
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...%20PL%2011.pdf

  15. #15
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by FMCDH View Post
    Here is the original bill....
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...1016#documents

    Read the House report...it contains the Law Enforcement interest in the bill.
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...%20PL%2011.pdf
    Ok, thank you.
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by DEROS72 View Post
    I attended the hearing with Nick this morning and my impression was very positive.Even some enforcemnt officers from the fish and wildlife spoke in behalf of this bill.All together the room was pretty full and we estimate about 2 to 1 in favor. Nick did a good job in his presentation although they were limited to about 90 seconds.These are the sort of things we need to be showing up at as opposed to anti rallys that did not accomplish anything.I observed that Nick and I were the only ones there.There were alot of folks from ranges and other gun groups however.

    On a side note I spoke to a reporter and cameraman from CNN that were actually there covering another hearing.The reporter was from DC and had followed me into the hearing room.I was OC. He said in amazment that he watched me walk by 3 state patrol officers and nothing was said.One did say good morning.This reporter was shaking his head in surprise that we could do that here in the capital no less .He was also surprised we didn't have pat downs and metal detectors .He said somehting about the swat team if you did that there.Anyway Nick came up as well to talk with them and filled them in a little on Wa. gun rights and I think they had a different perspective on Wa. gun owners and the rights we still have.
    What an education the CNN reporter got, great job Deros. Wish I could have been there this time. This is the way its done.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    UPDATE, from Rep. Hansen

    Pasted from my email, the language agreed upon with regard to HB1508

    (1) In any nuisance action based on noise or noise pollution
    7 brought against a person who owns or operates a permanently located and
    8 improved sport shooting range, it is an affirmative defense to the
    9 nuisance action that the sport shooting range was in operation prior to
    10 the date the plaintiff acquired title to the real property adversely
    11 affected by the use of the sport shooting range and that there has not
    12 been a substantial change in the nature of the use of the sport
    13 shooting range since the date the plaintiff acquired title to the
    14 adversely affected real property.

    This language won unanimous bipartisan support today in the Judiciary Committee Ė all six Republicans as well as all seven Democrats voted to support it -- and Iíll look forward to seeing it move forward.

    Thank you again for writing, and please stop by and visit if youíre ever in Olympia!
    Drew
    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?

  18. #18
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by DEROS72 View Post

    On a side note I spoke to a reporter and cameraman from CNN that were actually there covering another hearing.The reporter was from DC and had followed me into the hearing room.I was OC. He said in amazment that he watched me walk by 3 state patrol officers and nothing was said.One did say good morning.This reporter was shaking his head in surprise that we could do that here in the capital no less .He was also surprised we didn't have pat downs and metal detectors .He said somehting about the swat team if you did that there.Anyway Nick came up as well to talk with them and filled them in a little on Wa. gun rights and I think they had a different perspective on Wa. gun owners and the rights we still have.
    Did you point out to the reporter that there was no blood flowing in the hallways even though you and Nick were carrying firearms?
    "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?"

Posting Permissions

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