Washington State AWB passes Senate, goes to House

[riverrat38]

"Federal law prohibits this. Washington State lawmakers are idiots."

I think that they just don't care. They are making good on campaign promises.
I am concerned about having go to classes in order to buy a gun. I an 80 years old and no longer am able to sit through day long classes. This will affect a lot of citizens in this State, people from both sides of the political spectrum. It might not be well received by voters. I have Liberal neighbors who are thinking of getting a firearm for home defense, now that the police have been told to stand down. These people don't like "assault weapons", but they want a Glock. A lot of them already have become gun owners in recent years.

73,
Rick

 

[Racer X]

"Federal law prohibits this. Washington State lawmakers are idiots."

I think that they just don't care. They are making good on campaign promises.
I am concerned about having go to classes in order to buy a gun. I an 80 years old and no longer am able to sit through day long classes. This will affect a lot of citizens in this State, people from both sides of the political spectrum. It might not be well received by voters. I have Liberal neighbors who are thinking of getting a firearm for home defense, now that the police have been told to stand down. These people don't like "assault weapons", but they want a Glock. A lot of them already have become gun owners in recent years.

73,
Rick

I am hoping there might be on-line options. X hours, PLUS travel time ends up being 2 or 3x amounts of time. No way are any in-person classes going to be IN places like Seattle or Tacoma. Probably places hours away or over in E Washington.

But plenty of time to get it tossed out by 2025, when it goes into effect.

Good Lord, how many of us are retired LEOs, firearms instructors or Range Safety Officers? Should be exclusions at the bare minimum.

 

[S-W4EVER]

... Good Lord, how many of us are retired LEOs, firearms instructors or Range Safety Officers? Should be exclusions at the bare minimum.

Exactly, I'm a retired LE Firearms Instructor so I've forgot more than most will ever know about how & when to use a firearm. I'm retired now, living within my means, and I doubt I'll ever buy another firearm. I knew this was coming so I purchased most of the firearms & mags I would ever want before this ban.

 

[Racer X]

Exactly, I'm a retired LE Firearms Instructor so I've forgot more than most will ever know about how & when to use a firearm. I'm retired now, living within my means, and I doubt I'll ever buy another firearm. I knew this was coming so I purchased most of the firearms & mags I would ever want before this ban.

so did I. I purchased magazines for pistols I plan to buy in the future.

 

[fordson]

Curious as to the financial impact of this new law…..
Thru no fault of your own, you've suffered a financial loss since you can no longer sell or trade your legally purchased private property. Same as if the State banned sports cars because too many kids were racing them, causing accidents. Couldn't sell your 1967 Stingray Corvette. Sounds like a valid law suite.

 

[Modified]

Curious as to the financial impact of this new law…..
Thru no fault of your own, you've suffered a financial loss since you can no longer sell or trade your legally purchased private property. Same as if the State banned sports cars because too many kids were racing them, causing accidents. Couldn't sell your 1967 Stingray Corvette. Sounds like a valid law suite.

Does this law forbid the sale of the guns to people out of state?

I know I have bought a lot of guns that had to leave California because they couldn't be sold within the state.

 

[Doug M.]

No, it does not.

 

[fordson]

No, it does not.

Well, then you can sell your firearms out of state and hopefully get some value back, if the glut of all these firearms doesn't lower their value…….

 

[Doug M.]

No way. If I have any of the prohibited platforms, they are grandfathered, and the litigation may be slow, but is likely to be successful. Not a lot of attention has been drawn to this, but the district court and 9th circuit opinions on Initiative 1639 were vacated by the 9th Circuit and sent back to the DC for reconsideration under Bruen. Ferguson has to know the entire basis for the bills is fabricated and that the alleged facts don't impact any of the scrutiny under Bruen; he does not care, which I think will come along to bite him in the backside. I have seen some of his shenanigans at work. I think he is a bully; not a competent or ethical lawyer, and he is unqualified for the position he holds.

Worst comes to worst, I have been looking at retirement in another location that does not have the I-5 dwellers problem.

 

[Racer X]

I hadn't even thought back to I-1639. Is there a requirement when the DC has to rule considering the Bruen decision?

 

[Doug M.]

I am sure it will not be rapid there is likely to be a new round of briefing so that the DC can consider I-1639 in the light of Bruen.