- Joined
- Jan 7, 2021
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 1,122
You can keep your standard capacity magazines. For now.
Washington magazine ban passed and signed
- Thread starter Racer X
- Start date
coltle6920
Member
Colorado went through this several years ago causing MagPul to move out of State. Politicians demanded that any hi-capacity mags be date stamped after the law went into effect. Never happened.
No telling how many gun owners stocked up before the ban. I bought as many as I wanted. I go to the range to shoot...not reload mags.
Even after the law went into effect gun stores were selling off their remaining mag inventory broken down in kits (replacement parts) and apparently getting away with it.
There never was any enforcement of the law after it's enactment. Law enforcement including almost every Sheriff's office said they would not enforce the law or even question anyone's legal ownership of a mag.
Bottom line IMHO is that more deaths from hi-capacity mags isn't the concern. It is just the means Big Brother wants to bring about their ultimate goal... Gun confiscation.
Never let a (manufactured) crisis go to waste.
No telling how many gun owners stocked up before the ban. I bought as many as I wanted. I go to the range to shoot...not reload mags.
Even after the law went into effect gun stores were selling off their remaining mag inventory broken down in kits (replacement parts) and apparently getting away with it.
There never was any enforcement of the law after it's enactment. Law enforcement including almost every Sheriff's office said they would not enforce the law or even question anyone's legal ownership of a mag.
Bottom line IMHO is that more deaths from hi-capacity mags isn't the concern. It is just the means Big Brother wants to bring about their ultimate goal... Gun confiscation.
Never let a (manufactured) crisis go to waste.
I don't "need" a normal capacity magazine, just like my next door neighbor doesn't "need" 12 kids.
JDBoardman
US Veteran
I read an article in one of the mainstream magazines (may have been the Atlantic) which reported the results of a crime study in an "unnamed" large city that indicated that better than 90% of the crime was committed by less than 1% of the population. The article suggested that if, somehow that 1% could be stopped from committing crimes, that the crime rate would fall to statistically insignificant numbers. Just think of the ramifications - if crime falls and remains down, then police officers are not as needed, judges won't have as many cases to try, so their numbers can also be reduced, and the lawyers, as represented by "Better Call Saul" would be forced, for the first time in their lives, to get honest employment, perhaps making those license plates that there are not enough convicts to make.
I thought it was Bill Ruger who told congress that 10 rounds was all anyone needed. He kept the Mini 14 off the hit list.
I have absolutely no reason to believe that isn't true.
even assuming that each murder by a firearm was committed by a different individual, those 20,000 a year divided by what, 80-160 million firearm owners? its just .0125 % to .025% of firearm owners committing a murder a year.
mass shootings? at @400 fatalities a year, it's 1/50th of those .025%
the media and the ignorant are winning.
Last edited:
Doug M.
Member
Governor Inslee is considered a dullard by a lot of people I respect. I am aware of nothing that would change my mind.
The legislation in question was put forward by a few legislators at the specific request of Bob Ferguson, the Attorney General of Washington. I have had several professional encounters with his activities and my view of him would peel the paint off a battleship. I do not consider him honest or honorable; to make it worse, he is not dumb. This makes him very dangerous. I think there is a good argument for a recall and disbarment, but most people seem to have little idea who he is and what he costs us with his conduct. The AGO also does a ghastly job of risk management; the State gets sued over stupid stuff and loses on a regular basis. It has been a dumpster fire since I moved here in 1993; but it at its worst under Ferguson. Unfortunately, while I know a couple folks who would be really good at the job, they don't want it because in part taking on and cleaning out the problem children would be a vile job. Their culture is too much based on being "nice", and not enough on being correct in the advise given. I am fortunate to work in a place where I rarely have to back people into corners and scream at them, but if I do, they have to take it.
The good news is that the State law analysis of firearm rights cases seems to be done under "strict scrutiny", although I do not have much faith in our current state Supreme Court. Better news is that I read the whole SCOTUS majority and concurrences yesterday when it came out, and it looks like strict scrutiny is the standard there, too. I doubt magazine capacity limits will survive such scrutiny, and I also have little doubt that Ferguson will waste our money on the fight. Considering the various Glock platforms I have, and that Glock is VERY CLEAR that reduced capacity magazines are not sufficiently reliable for serious use, I have a dog in the fight.
The legislation in question was put forward by a few legislators at the specific request of Bob Ferguson, the Attorney General of Washington. I have had several professional encounters with his activities and my view of him would peel the paint off a battleship. I do not consider him honest or honorable; to make it worse, he is not dumb. This makes him very dangerous. I think there is a good argument for a recall and disbarment, but most people seem to have little idea who he is and what he costs us with his conduct. The AGO also does a ghastly job of risk management; the State gets sued over stupid stuff and loses on a regular basis. It has been a dumpster fire since I moved here in 1993; but it at its worst under Ferguson. Unfortunately, while I know a couple folks who would be really good at the job, they don't want it because in part taking on and cleaning out the problem children would be a vile job. Their culture is too much based on being "nice", and not enough on being correct in the advise given. I am fortunate to work in a place where I rarely have to back people into corners and scream at them, but if I do, they have to take it.
The good news is that the State law analysis of firearm rights cases seems to be done under "strict scrutiny", although I do not have much faith in our current state Supreme Court. Better news is that I read the whole SCOTUS majority and concurrences yesterday when it came out, and it looks like strict scrutiny is the standard there, too. I doubt magazine capacity limits will survive such scrutiny, and I also have little doubt that Ferguson will waste our money on the fight. Considering the various Glock platforms I have, and that Glock is VERY CLEAR that reduced capacity magazines are not sufficiently reliable for serious use, I have a dog in the fight.
squirrel rights lobbyists are to blame.
Similar threads
