Update: Felony for LEO to Arrest - Washington

Chillock

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
131
Reaction score
73
Location
Washington State
As some of you know I have spent a lot of time lately at our state capital talking, debating, and educating with our congress. With new information/expanded detail from some of our congress men and women, I felt I had enough background of the reasoning behind Bill 1371. Updated is below the original post. Very important regarding the thoughts and opinion behind this bill. It explains a lot.

Washington Bill 1371, current status: 01/13/14 reintroduced.

Summery: Deals with firearms, accessories and ammo made in WA.
Over-rides and makes Federal Laws after 01/01/13 dealing with the above void.
Makes it a felony for Government agents to arrest a citizen of Washington for following state firearm laws not federal laws that are considered to be void in the state of Washington (of course is only for within the boundaries of Washington state). Also states punishment for Federal agents if convicted of the above. Sentence, min. 365 days, max 5 years or $10,000 fine.

In addition to the above, this bill will remove the right of the Governor to proclaim carrying a firearm prohibited during the state of emergency.

This bill really is loaded! Here is the link if you are interested:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2013-14/Pdf/Bills/House Bills/1371.pdf

So for those gun manufacturers thinking of leaving the state of your current location, please, by all means, move your business to Washington state.

----- UPDATE -----

A couple of comments made in regards to the main post above were: States cannot make laws that supersede federal laws (example: interstate speed limit of 60 mph, state cannot pass a law allowing a limit of 70 mph). Keep in mind the example does not take into account areas where the interstate is combined with the intrastate highway.

Most of you know, a requirement for a lot of the last states to join the United States was to write and submit a state constitution before being ratified as a state. The state constitution is a contract with the federal government.
Here is why Washington state congress believes the above bill will PASS Supreme Court ruling as lawful.

-- "The second amendment to the United States Constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Washington was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Washington and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Washington and the United States in 1889." --

Washington State's constitution guarantees by law the right to bear arms almost word for word as the second amendment to the United States Constitution. Hence, in a contract with the state of Washington, rules and regulations regarding the right to bear arms was agree upon by the United States government.

-- "Article I, section 24 of the Washington state Constitution clearly secures to Washington citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Washington citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Washington state Constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Washington, and the right exists as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Washington and the United States in 1889." --

There is also a section in Washington state constitution that makes it illegal for any federal law enforcement agent/agency to enforce a federal law that is not allowed (by state law) to supersede said state law. Hence, the penalties listed in the bill for any LEO to try to enforce federal gun laws on Washington state residents/citizens.

Hope this clears things up and provides more understand for everyone and stops the less than positive remarks and hopes for the future of this law. :)


Have a great day and stay safe!
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
I predict with some confidence that this legislation will not be passed and signed into law. In case I am naive and it is passed and signed, I predict it will not survive the inevitable Supreme Court review.

Any state can pass laws that refine or enlarge upon a Federal law within constitutional limits, but no state can pass laws that invalidate a Federal law.
 
I too was wondering about the voiding of Federal law; however I know there are few exceptions dealing with manufacturing for the intent to sell within the state. I don't remember what the exceptions are and cannot find the rules in the protocols and regulations.

I also like the part about removing the Governor's right to prohibit citizens to carry firearms during the state of emergency.
 
I don't know much about Washington State and the gun laws there, but I 'spect this is grandstanding. My problem with this kind of proposed legislation is that, usually, there are plenty of state restrictions these legislators could be removing. A cursory glance at W State's laws shows this to be the case. Why do they waste time with grandstand stunts like this when they could be repealing unnecessarily restrictive state laws?
 
I think a lot of what the Feds feel give them the right to regulate has to do with an old farmer selling wheat/corn and interstate commerce.

The idea is if it all stays in state the Feds have no authority?
 
I think a lot of what the Feds feel give them the right to regulate has to do with an old farmer selling wheat/corn and interstate commerce.

The idea is if it all stays in state the Feds have no authority?

I believe so. The write up says over and over if it is manufactured in the state and stays within the states boundaries. The new law goes as far as stating any of the listed items have to be stamped indicating it was manufactured in the state of Washington.
 
I believe so. The write up says over and over if it is manufactured in the state and stays within the states boundaries. The new law goes as far as stating any of the listed items have to be stamped indicating it was manufactured in the state of Washington.

If any of the raw materials, such as bar stock, or lens glass for optics, just to name a couple of things, ships in from out of state, then the manufacturer is involved in interstate commerce.
 
[...] Any state can pass laws that refine or enlarge upon a Federal law within constitutional limits, but no state can pass laws that invalidate a Federal law.

Correct. So why is marijuana now legal in WA? :rolleyes:
 
If any of the raw materials, such as bar stock, or lens glass for optics, just to name a couple of things, ships in from out of state, then the manufacturer is involved in interstate commerce.

====================================

They get ya comin and goin, tsk, tsk.

I believe this battle has been fought before, and lost by the state.

Montana (maybe it was Idaho?) has threatened to do the same thing.
 
Correct. So why is marijuana now legal in WA? :rolleyes:

================================

Legal under state law but still a crime under Federal law.

The Feds could and may make a few arrest in WA, Feds said they wouldn't, but ya know how that goes.
 
Missouri passed a similar law last year trying to keep the Feds from enforcing federal laws which restricted the 2A rights. The governor vetoed and the veto over ride went no where. I would like to see the results of THAT court case though! :eek:
 
Last edited:
Montana has an on going p*ss*ng match with the feds over this very issue - if everything is manufactured in state, then the feds have no jurisdiction.
And MT has lots of mining to get the raw material.
 
How about the milling machines and other tools used to work those raw materials mined in Montana? Where were they manufactured?

Aw come on!! :D :D Who cares where the machines were made or from where the raw material comes. A bill like this get's passed, signed and then enforced and it goes to court. First case winds up in the SCOTUS and gets slapped down and all such laws are now null and void. Thus speaketh the government. ;)
 
Washington’s Governor Inslee was recently quoted in The Seattle Times listing the failure to enact new gun control laws as one of the failures of his first year. Additionally the state house is controlled by like minded Democrats. There is zero chance of this bill becoming law.
 
How about the milling machines and other tools used to work those raw materials mined in Montana? Where were they manufactured?

That's like saying the air we breath blew in from Canada and therefore we are Canadians.

They could try to go that far in interpreting commerce, but, they will never even bother, they will just declare it what ever they want to declare it. States rights????????? whats that???
 
Last edited:
Missouri passed a similar law last year trying to keep the Feds from enforcing federal laws which restricted the 2A rights. The governor vetoed and the veto over ride went no where. I would like to see the results of THAT court case though! :eek:

I think MO is tweaking that law and planning to debate it again very soon. They're not giving up that easy.
 
Missouri passed a similar law last year trying to keep the Feds from enforcing federal laws which restricted the 2A rights. The governor vetoed and the veto over ride went no where. I would like to see the results of THAT court case though! :eek:

The override didn't go no where. It was lost by two votes, both of whom originally voted for the bill, but changed their vote during the override because of pressure / favors from the governor and police organizations. As mentioned above it will be brought back up with tweaks.

Kansas DID pass their law and it's still on the books. They have traded letters with Eric "***hat" Holder, both of which have been pretty good.
 
Last edited:
The constitution is pretty explicit, and restrictive, about what federal government can and cannot do. Under the constitution stated do have much greater rights and ability to make laws; however, congress, supported by the federal courts has used the interstate commerce clause to greatly expand federal control over everything. The analogy that the air you breath blew in from another state, = interstate commerce, is not far from the truth.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top