AGR 2018 WA initiative bans almost all carry for 18-20 year old citizens

[Alpine]

So you all have probably seen the news about AGR dropping their "assault weapon" initiative. They need to get about 260k signatures before July 6.

The initiative does many horrible things.

Here's AGR's own executive summary:

Raise the minimum purchase age to 21 for all semi-automatic weapons.
* In Washington, it is currently easier to buy an assault weapon than it is to purchase a handgun because assault weapons are treated the same as hunting rifles. This must change.

Create an Enhanced Background Check at the time of purchase including:
* A local law enforcement check identical to the one we currently require for handguns.
* Requiring the purchaser show that they have completed a safety training course within the last five years that includes basic safety and safe storage rules, safe handling, and an overview of state and federal firearms laws.

Dangerous Access Prevention.
* Holds gun owners responsible if a child or other prohibited person accesses and uses an unsafely stored firearm to harm themselves or another person.

Ensure continued eligibility to possess or purchase an assault weapon.
* Requires the Washington Department of Licensing (DOL) and the appropriate law enforcement agencies to work together to develop a process to ensure that purchasers continue to be eligible to possess a firearm.

Requireinformed consent at the point of purchase about the inherent risks associated with the presence of a firearm in the home.
* Requires the notification at the point of sale that owning a firearm increases one’s risk for injury, death by suicide, domestic violence and homicide.

Establish a waiting period up to 10 days for the purchase of an assault weapon.

Here's the actual text:
http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/420201831446PM_364.docx

Something they didn't mention in their summary is that 18-20 year olds will not be able to publicly carry almost anything if this initiative becomes law.

(2) Unless an exception under RCW 9.41.042, 9.41.050, or 9.41.060 applies, a person at least eighteen years of age, but less than twenty-one years of age, may possess a pistol only:
(((1))) (a) In the person’s place of abode;
(((2))) (b) At the person’s fixed place of business; or
(((3))) (c) On real property under his or her control.
(3) Except in the places and situations identified in RCW 9.41.042(1)–(9) and RCW 9.41.060(1)-(10), a person at least eighteen years of age, but less than twenty-one years of age, may possess a semiautomatic assault rifle only:
(a) In the person’s place of abode;
(b) At the person’s fixed place of business;
(c) On real property under his or her control; or
(d) For the specific purpose of (i) moving to a new place of abode; (ii) traveling between the person’s place of abode and real property under his or her control; or (iii) selling or transferring the firearm in accordance with the requirements of this chapter; provided that in all of these situations the semiautomatic assault rifle is unloaded and either in secure gun storage or secured with a trigger lock or similar device that is designed to prevent the unauthorized use or discharge of the firearm.

The good news, we can win this fight. On 594 we were outspent 10-1 and still took it from polling at 72% to passing at 59%. The polling on this is weaker, a mere 65% and the SurveyMonkey Poll used for that was suspect as it was Seattle and Portland heavy.

There are several groups gearing up to fight including CCRKBA, FPC, etc. I have an inquiry out to the NRA to see what they're willing to do. If you are members you may want to send them this article and remind them what they did here before:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/1997/oct/13/nra-enters-fight-against-i-676-handgun-control/

“We will spend whatever it takes to defeat this attack on personal freedom,” Metaksa said. “The battle has certainly shifted to the states, and our members want us to be there fighting the fight.”

 

[Grapeshot]

In the game of Monopoly, he with the most money wins but this ain't no game.

They have no monopoly on activism - go get 'em. Burn their crops, make them eat dirt.

Contact all of your pro freedom organizations. Get all of your friends, families and neighbors to the polls - VOTE!

 

[MAC702]

Is "assault weapon" defined in Washington Law?

 

[deanf]

It's defined in the initiative.

 

[Grapeshot]

Is "assault weapon" defined in Washington Law?

I cannot find one. Several are close, but do not qualify for a cigar.

 

[Alpine]

The initiative would define all semi auto rifles as assault rifles, even 10-22s.

 

[tannerwaterbury]

Wouldn't this initiative fail anyways due to state preemption? They can't say THIS is a tax or anything of the sorts like how Seattle miracuously won the case with the State Supreme Court because of that idiotic tax vs fee loophole. They are going to have a helluva fight.

 

[deanf]

Wouldn't this initiative fail anyways due to state preemption? They can't say THIS is a tax or anything of the sorts like how Seattle miracuously won the case with the State Supreme Court because of that idiotic tax vs fee loophole. They are going to have a helluva fight.

No.

 

[solus]

When are Washingtonians going to either repeal or amend the Statutory WA Initiative system which has been around since the early 1900s, WA Citizens, not corporations initiate citizen’s initiative(s) through the SoS; WA Citizens, who are residents, must be signatory on the initiative's petition; WA Citizens, registered as voters within their communities, must cast votes on the initiative; as such, WA Citizens, and only them, must bear full accountability for the initiatives the WA citizens have passed.

Sorry the "State/Local Government" didn't initiate any of the firearms inititatives a small group of Wa citizens are upset passed initiated by Washingtonian citizens did!

Whom would you like NRA's ILA to intercede with...the State's citizens who initiated, who signed the petitions, and who voted for the past anti initiatives?

NRA's ILA might/will intercede when there is something within the judicial system, e.g., courts, which might mitigate egregious State Legislation, but as stated numerous times, the State of WASHINGTON'S CITIZENS instigated this fiasco and the State's statutes says the Legislature is unable to mitigate the people's will for a minimum of xyz years (https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governi..._in_Washington)

Otherwise, NRA's ILA sole purpose, quote:
The Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is thelobbying arm of the NRA. Established in 1975, ILA is committed to preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

ILA’s ability to fight successfully for the rights of America’s law-abiding gun owners directly reflects the support of NRA’s 5 million members—a number that has more than tripled since 1978. When restrictive “gun control” legislation is proposedat the local, state or federal level, NRA members and supporters are alerted and respond with individual letters, faxes, e-mails and calls to their elected representatives to make their views known. unquote.
https://www.nraila.org/about/

As mentioned Washington's legislature has absolutely no control over Washington citizen's initiatives, until at least xyz years when the legislature can amend or rescind the initiative's statutory changes in WA law.

If Washingtonians want relief, once and for all, from this and future anti firearm initatives, shut down the initiative system as fighting each initiative is STUPID, and as past has shown doesn’t work one iota!

added: the proper initiative reference is 1639, by Paul Kramer of Seattle.

 

[solus]

The initiative would define all semi auto rifles as assault rifles, even 10-22s.

With utmost respect Alpine, et al., the wording in the initiative document you previously cited [https://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/420201831446pm_364.docx] in a previous post in this thread has been signifcantly changed, including the definition of a semi assault rifle!

Your kind attention is directed to the WA SoS official text of initative 1639:
https://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/finaltext_1531.pdf

This way everyone is on the same sheet of initative!

 

[KBCraig]

With utmost respect Alpine, et al., the wording in the initiative document you previously cited [https://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/420201831446pm_364.docx] in a previous post in this thread has been signifcantly changed, including the definition of a semi assault rifle!

Your kind attention is directed to the WA SoS official text of initative 1639:
https://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/finaltext_1531.pdf

This way everyone is on the same sheet of initative!

And that does indeed include all semi-automatic rifles, including the 10/22, Model 60, and any other semiautomatic rifle, regardless of magazine type, stock style, or "scary features".

(25) "Semiautomatic assault rifle" means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.
"Semiautomatic assault rifle" does not include antique firearms, any firearm that has been made permanently inoperable, or any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.

 

[solus]

And that does indeed include all semi-automatic rifles, including the 10/22, Model 60, and any other semiautomatic rifle, regardless of magazine type, stock style, or "scary features".

Thanks, I found I couldn’t search the revised initiative document and my side by side attempt failed to readily turn up the definition which is why I mentioned it.