In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Wa state gun ban.

Horse Plains DrifterHorse Plains Drifter Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 40,233 ***** Forums Admin
edited May 2006 in General Discussion
Just saw on the news that the mayor and police chief of Seattle are calling for a state wide "assualt" weapons ban. I might be clearing out of this state faster than I thought.

Comments

  • sig232sig232 Member Posts: 8,018
    edited November -1
    If WA state does that then Oregon will not be far behind. Portland, Salem and Eugene would strip you of all your guns if it was not for the rural balance.
  • COLTCOLT Member Posts: 12,637 ******
    edited November -1
    MT quote:I might be clearing out of this state faster than I thought.

    ...Go ahead, your TOO close to CA anyways...[;)]





    ani-texas-flag.gif
  • spanielsellsspanielsells Member Posts: 12,498
    edited November -1
    If it is any consolation, Denver did the same a few years ago. They declared an AWB and even went as far as to prosecute law-abiding citizens who were driving from one suburb to another, where AW were legal, but the trip took them through Denver. Denver claimed that its AWB applied to everyone, resident or not.

    The case went to the CO Supreme Court in Denver v. Colorado. The state filed suit on behalf of legal gun owners and the Court sided with the citizens of Colorado, informing Denver that it could have an AWB that applied to its citizens just fine, but that it was unconstitutional for Denver to prosecute non-citizens merely traveling from Point A to Point B, when Points A and B were not in Denver.

    I realize that Seattle is the biggest city that you've got in WA. Denver, however, is the biggest city that CO has. Just because the big boys call for laws and pass laws does not mean that the little guys have to follow like sheep.
  • BlueTicBlueTic Member Posts: 4,072
    edited November -1
    Yeah - saw the news last night. Stupid people!!!!![:(!][:(!][:(!]
  • He DogHe Dog Member Posts: 51,593 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Must be caffine overload.
  • Da-TankDa-Tank Member Posts: 3,718 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Caliton or some thing like that. Wa. is full of Kali. people taking over. I really fell sorry for you guys but I left there in '72 when I saw this comming.
  • sig232sig232 Member Posts: 8,018
    edited November -1
    OR too, now full of Kalifornians, a large part from the Bay Area! Yikes!

    Rural Oregon is very gun friendly but the big cities and the college towns, off the scale liberal.
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    whats an assault weapon? thats what scares me...they were trying to make it so any mag fed shotgun rifle or pistol is an assalt weapon. no more 1911's a-5 brownings model 12 winchesters or ak-47's ar's By their definition, a 94 winnie is an assault weapon....I wonder if the chief found his glock yet?
  • spryorspryor Member Posts: 9,155
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
    If it is any consolation, Denver did the same a few years ago. They declared an AWB and even went as far as to prosecute law-abiding citizens who were driving from one suburb to another, where AW were legal, but the trip took them through Denver. Denver claimed that its AWB applied to everyone, resident or not.

    The case went to the CO Supreme Court in Denver v. Colorado. The state filed suit on behalf of legal gun owners and the Court sided with the citizens of Colorado, informing Denver that it could have an AWB that applied to its citizens just fine, but that it was unconstitutional for Denver to prosecute non-citizens merely traveling from Point A to Point B, when Points A and B were not in Denver.

    I realize that Seattle is the biggest city that you've got in WA. Denver, however, is the biggest city that CO has. Just because the big boys call for laws and pass laws does not mean that the little guys have to follow like sheep.


    Appears to be part of the planned/systematic disarming of the people.
  • LowriderLowrider Member Posts: 6,587
    edited November -1
    The limp-wristed mayor of Seattle attended the recent "Mayors' Anti-Crime Summit", or whatever the hell they called it, and came away all revved up. There were only about a dozen big city mayors in attendance but he got to rub elbows with such big thinkers as the Mayors of New York, Baltimore, Washington DC, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and a few others.

    Back to town comes His Honor with a big plan for solving violent crime in his city: "Let's get the Governor to take the guns away from all the people who DON'T commit crime in Washington." [V]

    Washington gun law is written so no governmental agency in the state, whether town, city, county, or whatever, can pass gun laws more stringent than the State law. So, as much as the Mayor of Seattle would like to outlaw some - or all - guns from his fair city he can't do it without seeing the law passed at the State level.

    This will go nowhere. There would be a political backlash of Biblical proportions if the State Legislature even thought about tightening Washington's gun laws. Just another liberal knee jerking.
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    I hope youre right. I wrote letters about this last time it came up hb 4367 I believe...there are currently about 20 bills circulating around olympia all aimed ar gun rights or taxes. My favorite is the one where they are going to tax lead....6 cents an ounce. even if it is bought in bulk...figure out what that adds to the cost of a round at the range......
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Curious as to the actual incidence of violent crime using "assault rifles" in Seattle; whether such incidence justifies their banning or whether the ban is rather only preemptive, in which case all is lost and whatever government says is for the public good need not have any relation to cause or the facts of the matter.
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
    Curious as to the actual incidence of violent crime using "assault rifles" in Seattle; whether such incidence justifies their banning or whether the ban is rather only preemptive, in which case all is lost and whatever government says is for the public good need not have any relation to cause or the facts of the matter.

    we actually had a kid go into the Tacoma mall and shoot 5-6 people with an SKS about 6 mo ago. I think I posted on it at the time
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by scottm21166
    we actually had a kid go into the Tacoma mall and shoot 5-6 people with an SKS about 6 mo ago. I think I posted on it at the time

    An SKS by definition is not an "assault rifle".
  • gunpaqgunpaq Member Posts: 4,607 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Remember when the AWB expired the LA police chief said on national TV, "Let the bloodshead begin!"

    Well, has there been any bloodshead involving "assault Weapon" type firearms? The same, more, or less sincethe ban expired?
  • KSUmarksmanKSUmarksman Member Posts: 10,705 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    so 5 people got shot with an SKS, any of us (if we were criminally inclined individuals) could do the same with an aging bolt action rifle or even an old black powder revolver. Hell, I'm sure there's people who could do that with a samurai sword.


    If they want to cut down on crime that should PROMOTE gun ownership among law abiding citizens and promote concealed carry.
  • chunkstylechunkstyle Member Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    True, an SKS is not an "assualt rifle". Unfortunately, they are talking about banning "assault weapons". Big difference. To me, an "assault weapon" is one that has been used in an assualt. But the antis have different ideas.

    There have been statements made lately in the Minnesota press about "getting illegal guns off the street". How do you tell is a given gun is illegal? I raised my hand at this point and said simply, "Look at the hand that's holding it".
  • Horse Plains DrifterHorse Plains Drifter Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 40,233 ***** Forums Admin
    edited November -1
    quote:Lowrider Posted
    Washington gun law is written so no governmental agency in the state, whether town, city, county, or whatever, can pass gun laws more stringent than the State law.
    Cool! Didn't know that.



    quote:This will go nowhere. There would be a political backlash of Biblical proportions if the State Legislature even thought about tightening Washington's gun laws. Just another liberal knee jerking.Sure hope you are right on this one Lowrider.
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
    quote:Originally posted by scottm21166
    we actually had a kid go into the Tacoma mall and shoot 5-6 people with an SKS about 6 mo ago. I think I posted on it at the time

    An SKS by definition is not an "assault rifle".

    the recent house bill I mentioned classified any weapon with a capacity of over 5 rds as an assault weapon. also any weapon with a detachable magazine. they were trying to encompass home defense style shotguns, all SKS and ar style rifles (assault) and managed to include too many guns with those loose rules. my thought is this will be a new bill with more certain language but that same ol song and dance. take guns away from civilians[xx(]
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by chunkstyle
    True, an SKS is not an "assualt rifle". Unfortunately, they are talking about banning "assault weapons".

    Fact is, an SKS is no different in basic function and capability than either a Remington 7600 or Browning BAR. That is what is so scary about this; that the mere use of a semi-automatic rifle on persons in a public place alone makes that rifle and all others like it an "assault rifle", and this regardless of previous definition of having a collapsible stock and/or pistol grip and/or detachable magazine and/or bayonet lug; in other words, a thing is defined by use rather than purpose or design; in other words, throwing a California roll out your car window and hitting a pedestrian makes it "Assault Sushi".
  • DireknyteDireknyte Member Posts: 22 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    And here I was thinking about moving to the NW territories....

    *sigh*[V]
  • amsptcdsamsptcds Member Posts: 679
    edited November -1
    boy aren't we quickly becoming a nation of vaginas?
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    I typed in assault weapon on photobucket search to see what most people would describe as an assault weapon.. that title is not allowed by photobucket...however you can type in AK-47 and get 57 photos
  • amsptcdsamsptcds Member Posts: 679
    edited November -1
    should law support phantasms?

    it does in crackifornia.

    gee I guess california DOES lead all the other states.
    it creates diseases that infect other fools and cowards.
  • sig232sig232 Member Posts: 8,018
    edited November -1
    I guess since the attempt by several major cities over the last few years to sue the gun industry failed they will now try to pass local laws to eliminate firearms. Chicago, Washington DC and others have done it. San Francisco is attempting to do it and with the political climate in California the way it is today I imagine they will get it done.

    It is still easy to get a gun permit in Washington State and in Oregon. You can carry in the woods without a problem. But the cancer always seems to fester in the large cities and spread to the other cities within the state. Oregon has been battling with a couple of anti-gun nuts for a long time and so far keeping them at bay.
    The city of Portland says you can't carry a gun with a permit to carry on any of the public transportation, but the county and the state says you can. They still will arrest you if they know you have a gun and then you have to pay the big money to sort it out. They know most people can't afford to go down the legal path so city officials just do what they want, until someone with the big bucks takes them to task and spends millions to set a presidence with case law. Liberals think they can make up law in their heads and that makes it so and you have to prove otherwise. That is the situation in most of the big cities in this country today
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by sig232
    I guess since the attempt by several major cities over the last few years to sue the gun industry failed they will now try to pass local laws to eliminate firearms. Chicago, Washington DC and others have done it. San Francisco is attempting to do it and with the political climate in California the way it is today I imagine they will get it done.

    It is still easy to get a gun permit in Washington State and in Oregon. You can carry in the woods without a problem. But the cancer always seems to fester in the large cities and spread to the other cities within the state. Oregon has been battling with a couple of anti-gun nuts for a long time and so far keeping them at bay.
    The city of Portland says you can't carry a gun with a permit to carry on any of the public transportation, but the county and the state says you can. They still will arrest you if they know you have a gun and then you have to pay the big money to sort it out. They know most people can't afford to go down the legal path so city officials just do what they want, until someone with the big bucks takes them to task and spends millions to set a presidence with case law. Liberals think they can make up law in their heads and that makes it so and you have to prove otherwise. That is the situation in most of the big cities in this country today.

    This is all well and good, but if the incidence of crime does not support legislation introduced to prevent or reduce it, then the motivation is other than for the public good, but rather a unilateral desire for the populace not to have guns. Big difference, and one cloaked in agenda and deceit. I would prefer the honest purpose "We just don't want guns around" rather than the contrived purpose of public good.
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    Seattle rules the rest of the stste...here are a few examples...we all pay taxes to fund the failed monorail system...still
    we all pay taxes to fund the building of a new highway bridge or tunnel to run around seattles waterfront
    we all pay taxes to build safeco field when we voted against it
    we pay taxes to pay for seahawks stadium when the majority of the population voted to keep the kingdome
    we all pay taxes to fund light rail through the seattle corridor
    I never go to seattle
    the majority of washingtons population are liberal democrats who live in the seattle metro area. the other side of the state is like a whole different world desert, rural farms and high plains..and yet they pay too.
    Seattle is the kingdom and wee are the peasants feeding the king and his court
Sign In or Register to comment.