Bob Ferguson's Ban on Commonly Owned Semi-Autos

[thewise1]

Once again I find myself thankful that I moved to Idaho.

But man, I feel for you guys, dealing with this idiocy.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Once again I find myself thankful that I moved to Idaho.

But man, I feel for you guys, dealing with this idiocy.

I think that, over time, the salty weapons bans will do just the opposite of what they intended.

 

[mnrobitaille]

Clear violation of Washington State Constitution

For those who are not familiar with the Washington State Constitution, Article 1, Section 24 states:

SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

As part of House Bill 1134/Senate Bill 5050 Section 2, Subsection 3, states the following:

(3) In order to continue to possess an assault weapon or large capacity magazine that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section, the person possessing the assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall:
(a) Store the assault weapon or large capacity magazine in a secure gun storage; and
(b) Possess the assault weapon or large capacity magazine only on property owned or immediately controlled by the person, or while engaged in the legal use of the assault weapon or large capacity magazine at a duly licensed firing range, or while engaged in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, or while traveling to or from either of these locations for the purpose of engaging in the legal use of the assault weapon or large capacity magazine, provided that the assault weapon or large capacity magazine is stored unloaded and in a separate locked container during transport.

How I am reading the above passage is that if you have a pistol which has a magazine that has a capacity of 10+ rounds, you must, under this legislation, have it unloaded while traveling in a vehicle, even if in possession of a WA CPL. Unless I am misunderstanding the wording, how the bill is written is a clear impairment of RKBA as stated in the Washington State Constitution.

 

[Whitney]

FOIA response from insurance commissioner

<SNIP>
it sounds like I should be doing a FOIA request from the Insurance commissioner now.


I have also cross posted this over on Northwest Firearms. There you can view, without downloading, the proposal from my batch 2 files.

~Whitney

FOIA response from the insurance commissioner is pretty weak. LINK@my Dropbox
At any rate it appears there may be some action from his office based on his "personal" views and following "talking points".

*Assault weapons and high-volume magazines increase the risk that someone will be hurt.
*Insurance prices are based on risk, so owning or handling those weapons increase everyone’s risk, both of injury or death and of facing higher insurance premiums because people own them.
*This is an issue Commissioner Kreidler cares about on a personal level. It’s an issue he worked on when he served in Congress.


I do not like this one bit.

~Whitney

 

[golddigger14s]

Once again I find myself thankful that I moved to Idaho.

But man, I feel for you guys, dealing with this idiocy.

Moving just means they win. Do you think they will stop at WA? The antis are like gang green, it will grow like a cancer. We need to dig in, and stop it from growing.

 

[solus]

Why Texas? Texas has some of the most repressive firearms laws in the country! A list of prohibited places a mile long - no guns signs with the force of law - you have to pay for training for a CHL and the initial CHL will cost you $140, renewal $70. No thank you.

oh, oh, oh...don't forget they have OC now...oh wait with a permit slip...never mind!!

ipse

 

[Wstar425]

Why Texas? Texas has some of the most repressive firearms laws in the country! A list of prohibited places a mile long - no guns signs with the force of law - you have to pay for training for a CHL and the initial CHL will cost you $140, renewal $70. No thank you.

I don't know if I would say "most regressive" but I sure do think they get ranked a lot higher than they belong in those state firearm freedom type rankings. The CHL required to OC, and the requirements need to get the CHL in the first place should put them down in the middle of the pack, not 10-12 where they usually end up. If your criteria doesn't value OC much or at all, maybe a little higher? But, that's the wrong measuring stick.

For a long time Texas has been held up as a great state for gun rights, which always confused me somewhat.

Training is good. Forced or required training not so good.

 

[()pen(arry]

What do we feel is the realistic possibility of this passing the legislature? I know it's almost certain to pass by initiative, but what about this specific bill, this legislative session?

 

[Whitney]

BAN

One only needs to read the definitions to understand this encompasses every semiautomatic rifle and most every semiautomatic pistol in existence today.

If passed, HB 1134 or Companion SB 5050 would effectively eradicate all retail and private commerce in firearms. (read that line again) !!

Read the definitions carefully; words have meaning to the writer and as we found in the crafting of 1388 and subsequently I-594, transfer does not mean what we initially thought it meant.

From the linked PDF an assault weapon is defined as :
"Assault weapon" means: A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following:
A shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that
encloses the barrel;

A semiautomatic pistol, or a semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition;

The wooden stock found on almost every production rifle partial encircles the barrel allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned.
If you look through my FOIA responses you will find an email that addresses this and its relation to "hunting rifles".
This is not a feeble attempt to slip something by the citizens it is thought out and planned by Frockt with the assistance of the AG and his minions.


That said I believe it has a good chance of passing out of the house but will have a hard time passing out of the senate.

If a citizen initiative is initiated and placed on the ballot it will have to be defeated by the voters. If it comes to fruition only the courts will be able to sort it out.

My argument of unconstitutional is based on Washington State constitution Article I, Section 24’.

~Whitney

 

[Whitney]

Batch 4 FOIA response

This is batch 4 of my FOIA request. I am still fighting to get the attachments not previously included in batch 2.
This batch contains some media information with Seattle times and local news stations.

It appears the AG office is basing their argument on the Heller decision.

Dropbox - B4 PC.pdf

~Whitney

 

[gogodawgs]

Failed to get out of committee in the house today.

 

[Whitney]

Last Update

This is batch 5 of my FOIA request and likely the last I will receive from the AG office on this topic.
Most of the stuff here is redundant but I did finally get the memo and attachments I have been asking for.
Following are page numbers with new or curious information that may require a follow on request.

P97; Aldo's memo with the original draft revisions. Note the experts quoted are Seattle Times, Ceasefire, and Mayors against Illegal guns. Arguments are centered around the U. S. Constitution and the Heller decision. Page 102 contains the excell spreadsheet information comparing state bans. A better version appears on page 903.

P396; Discussion with regard to the "best definition" of "assault weapon". Seems the AG cant define it either.

P443; Comparison and discussion of differences in the drafts, specifically Z-0113.2 and z-0113.w, both of which have been withheld from me until this response.

P513; Senator Frockt appears to use gmail for state buisiness; dsfrockt@gmail.com ??? Later Frokt states to use his official mail and the recipient states he doesn't know how he could have used a personal email address.

P529; Who is Joel Stonington; stonington@aljazeera.net (thinking outloud, it is apparent later)

P543; Robert Sibler; @statsonsibler.com, appear to be workmans compensation attourneys. ??

P556; Who is DGJurasic@comcast.net ?? Davor?

P615; Davor G Jurasic; dgjurasic@comcast.net; DAVOR GJURASIC | accesshub ? Paid lobbyist

P677; AG meeting w/ WSPTA requested by paid lobbyist Davor Jurasic

P779; Magazine language and common threads with other bans.

P827; What is the Constituents Correspondence Tracking Notebook? CCTN. What are the stats from all the tallied comments with regard to Agree vs Disagree? FOIA this Information separately.

P833; Seattle Brady Chapter, seattle@bradymail.org (Was not aware the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence had state chapters)

P873; Al Jazeera interview with AG Ferguson ??

P903; Best image of xcell spreadsheet comparing state gun bans.

P970; Interesting e-mail albeit incomplete.

P1526; This is the original intent of prohibition from the horses mouth.

I'm glad they don't charge by the page. !! There is a lot more to say on this as it will likely get around to a citizen initiative.

~Whitney

PS I want to remind this audience my argument with regard to unconstitutional bans is centered around the Washington State Constitution, NOT the U.S. Constitution. Our state version is much stronger than the U. S. version.

 

[carracer]

" All weapons...." ?

 

[Freedom1Man]

" All weapons...." ?

Yes, what is wrong with that?
Part of having rights is having responsibility.

 

[Freedom1Man]

Part of having rights is duty.

Explain.

 

[Freedom1Man]

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Nicely done.

How do you make another act on their duty?

 

[OC for ME]

Nicely done.

How do you make another act on their duty?

The same way you make another eat fish.

 

[solus]

The same way you make another eat fish.

convert the individual to Catholicism?

just saying...

ipse

 

[countryclubjoe]

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Is that a Jefferson quote? Either or I concur.

Regards
CCJ

 

[mikeyb]

Is that a Jefferson quote? Either or I concur.

Regards
CCJ

Did you never watch National Treasure? Nic Cage said it. :lol:

One thing (hyperbole) that bothers me is this line that's added:

Provided the person in possession of the assault weapon or
large capacity magazine can establish such provenance.

Context- If you're "caught" with a banned rifle/pistol/magazine, you have to prove you owned it before the ban.