Another WA Gun Initiative.

Ranb

Penultimate Amazing
Ranb
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
11,325
Location
WA USA
The passage of I-594 (universal bkgd checks) was a big boost for the gun control crowd a few years ago. It seems some people are ignoring the new laws created by the initiative and only one arrest has been made. Some people do go through a dealer to make a private sale, but as far as I know, most people still don't bother. At least one provision of I-594 has been eased. For example it is no longer a crime to allow a friend to shoot your gun at the local gun club without a bkgd check.

https://gunresponsibility.org/news/ballot-initiative-assault-weapon/

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.
Click to expand...
I guess some adults just aren't supposed to enjoy their civil rights.

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.
Click to expand...
There is a bit more bkgd checking for a handgun purchase in WA other than the federal NICS bkgd check. I can't really see this doing anything to reduce crime.

When Hawaii passed a similar law in the 90's, many people used the hunter safety course to obtain proof of the course.

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.
Click to expand...
The one thing that would probably pass on the ballot if it was all by itself.

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.
Click to expand...
The actual text of the initiative is just as vague.

Require informed 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.
Click to expand...

Yeah yeah, guns r bad. Gimme my Ruger 10/22.


https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/420201831446pm_364.docx
While most definitions of assault weapons say something like semi-auto that have 1 or 2 of a list of six various features, this initiative will define all semi-auto rifles as assault rifles; except for antiques and non-functioning guns.

Sec. 16. RCW 9.41.010 and 2018 c 7 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(30) “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.
Click to expand...

Ranb
 
They're just gun nuts. They're a sacrifice I'm willing to make. It's good that people would be unsure or scared to buy or transfer guns. If it gets gun ownership rates down, it's a positive.
 
Craig4 said:
They're just gun nuts. They're a sacrifice I'm willing to make. It's good that people would be unsure or scared to buy or transfer guns. If it gets gun ownership rates down, it's a positive.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? Since 2014 gun sales have only increased as far as I can tell. I-594 has not seemed to reduced gun sales at all nor discouraged purchases.
 
But the data suggests the number of gun owners is going down. It's more guns going into the same hands. We don't appear to be generating new gun owners.
 
Just move to VA, then you don't even need a license to carry concealed. A true gun owners paradise.
 
Ranb said:
What are you talking about? Since 2014 gun sales have only increased as far as I can tell. I-594 has not seemed to reduced gun sales at all nor discouraged purchases.
Click to expand...

Not since 2016. See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt after expanding to sell more guns to the same politically motivated buyers. The surge in gun sales was never to new gun owners.
 
Ranb said:
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.
Click to expand...


There is a bit more bkgd checking for a handgun purchase in WA other than the federal NICS bkgd check. I can't really see this doing anything to reduce crime.
Click to expand...

Regarding that bit specifically :

I've long been of the opinion that safety training should be mandatory for anyone purchasing a firearm (mainly because of the mind-numbingly stupid things I've seen/heard of people doing in no way related to self defense or crisis situations), but have wondered if that would be practical in reality. Would there be places where the courses were so expensive that it put things out of reach for people? Or places where there simply weren't courses offered anywhere remotely near by? Would there have to be state/federal guidelines drawn up for what the courses had to teach and how (to prevent, say, me from charging people $100 to tell them "don't keep it loaded and unlocked at home" then sending them on their way with a cert)?

I haven't owned a firearm or gone shooting in years so this is all academic for me at this point. Curious if you think the safety training bit is workable and/or a good thing in this case?

Oh, and that "Require informed consent" part looks utterly asinine. Comes off just as transparent as requiring doctors to tell women about all the horrors abortion might bring before performing one.
 
Craig4 said:
They're just gun nuts. They're a sacrifice I'm willing to make. It's good that people would be unsure or scared to buy or transfer guns. If it gets gun ownership rates down, it's a positive.
Click to expand...

"They came for my neighbors' guns, and I didn't say anything, I was not a gun owner. Then they came for my whiskey..."
 
Joe Random said:
Regarding that bit specifically :

I've long been of the opinion that safety training should be mandatory for anyone purchasing a firearm
Click to expand...

That is just silly, guns are inherently safe that is why they are specifically excluded from all consumer safety laws. You can force a company to recall a chair but guns are only ever voluntary recalls. Treating them as dangerous is gun grabby nonsense.
 
casebro said:
"They came for my neighbors' guns, and I didn't say anything, I was not a gun owner. Then they came for my whiskey..."
Click to expand...

"They came for my neighbor's rape room and torture chamber, and I said nothing because I am not a serial rapist. Then they came for collection of porcelain figurines . . . ."


I mean, mine makes as much sense as yours...
 
Craig4 said:
But the data suggests the number of gun owners is going down. It's more guns going into the same hands. We don't appear to be generating new gun owners.
Click to expand...
Got a link to the data you have? What does your claim have to do with bkgd checks or other issues affected by the initiative?

ponderingturtle said:
Not since 2016. See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt after expanding to sell more guns to the same politically motivated buyers. The surge in gun sales was never to new gun owners.
Click to expand...
Link?
 
Last edited:
Joe Random said:
Regarding that bit specifically :
.... Would there be places where the courses were so expensive that it put things out of reach for people? Or places where there simply weren't courses offered anywhere remotely near by?....
Click to expand...
I'm certain there are going to be people who will have a hard time finding the services required to able to buy a gun. In Western WA where I live and in Hawaii where I used to live various gun clubs have stepped up to provide the required training for a reasonable price.
 
ponderingturtle said:
That is just silly, guns are inherently safe that is why they are specifically excluded from all consumer safety laws. You can force a company to recall a chair but guns are only ever voluntary recalls. Treating them as dangerous is gun grabby nonsense.
Click to expand...
You're saying that there is a federal law shielding the gun industry from recalls?
 
ponderingturtle said:
Not since 2016. See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt after expanding to sell more guns to the same politically motivated buyers. The surge in gun sales was never to new gun owners.
Click to expand...
All as in Colt and Remington? Doesn't seem like the industry is in big trouble for the most part.
 
Ranb said:
I guess some adults just aren't supposed to enjoy their civil rights.
Click to expand...
This is a not an unprecedented state of affairs - we do the same thing by restricting alcohol sales to over 21, even though it's 18 for tobacco products. It's true that's inconsistent ... but is it much of a hardship, in practice?

Ranb said:
What are you talking about? Since 2014 gun sales have only increased as far as I can tell. I-594 has not seemed to reduced gun sales at all nor discouraged purchases.
Click to expand...
As others have pointed out, this seems to be inaccurate. My methodology is loose - "gun sales have fallen" yields 10 million hits, "gun sales have risen" yields 1 million hits. Can you indicate how you're getting your data?
 
Ranb said:
All as in Colt and Remington? Doesn't seem like the industry is in big trouble for the most part.
Click to expand...
Smith & Wesson? How many companies should be involved in order to make the point?

I'm not a gun control idealist ... I just really wonder where you are getting your data.

I've seen a couple of explanations. "They are coming for your guns" helps gun sales, "Don't worry, your rights are secure" doesn't. Also, abbreviated deer seasons due to climate issues.
 
Minoosh said:
Smith & Wesson? How many companies should be involved in order to make the point?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what ponderingturtle meant by "See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt".

I'm not a gun control idealist ... I just really wonder where you are getting your data.
Click to expand...
I got my data with a google search on gun makers going bankrupt. Doesn't seem to be lots of them actually closing their manufacturing plants.
 
Ranb said:
Link?
Click to expand...

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-are-white-men-stockpiling-guns/

"Since the 2008 election of President Obama, the number of firearms manufactured in the U.S. has tripled, while imports have doubled. This doesn’t mean more households have guns than ever before—that percentage has stayed fairly steady for decades. Rather, more guns are being stockpiled by a small number of individuals. Three percent of the population now owns half of the country’s firearms, says a recent, definitive study from the Injury Control Research Center at Harvard University."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom