Washington state bill banning "assault weapons"

[Angel Eyes]

http://app.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2354&year=2015

For our friends in Washington state: what chances does this have of becoming law?

[BobR]

I would say slim to none, but it will take a lot of people voicing their displeasure at the bill to make that happen. Tours to the Capitol are already in the works.

And because the Seattle ammo tax went over so well there is now a bill being floated to make it statewide. :(

http://app.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2374&year=2015

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/2374.pdf

All of this liberalism coming out of the west side makes me want to move about another 45 miles east into Idaho. But instead I will be in Olympia fighting these bills,because the lawmakers understand thousands of people standing on the lawn in opposition. Usually any bills to restrict or ban guns have a very large and vocal turnout of voters on hearing days. I will make the drive cross-state for every one of them.

bob

bob

[Ben]

I wish you guys in WA well, and I hope you can keep duster boy out of the limelight this time. Given the current climate, the pro side can't afford any public perception foul ups.

[Unisaw]

Duster boy??? 

[BobR]

I hope you can keep duster boy out of the limelight this time

You and me both. He has already cost us the ability to carry weapons into the Capitol gallery, well him and some of his friends.

Duster boy:



I have OCd in the Capitol numerous times and never had my picture taken.

bob

eta: This is the other guy we don't need a lot of help from.

http://www.kxly.com/news/spokane-news/marshals-arrest-man-carrying-weapon-at-federal-courthouse/31486396

We used to have a really nice plaza in front of the Federal courthouse where you could just sit and enjoy whatever while armed in downtown Spokane. Since this guy showed up with his AK a federal judge ruled that the federal property for firearms exclusion extends out to the sidewalk. :(

[MillCreek]

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Angel Eyes]

Duster boy:

Shouldn't he be at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, like a true patriot?

I have OCd in the Capitol numerous times and never had my picture taken.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.   

[BobR]

I wouldn't be so sure about that.   

Well, it wasn't plastered all over the media after they took it. I do have to amend my statement, I have a picture of myself in front of the Governor's office and standing next to a giant George Washington head.

bob

[tokugawa]

The political makeup has changed a lot. 20 years ago the registration AKA background check was over whelmingly defeated. Now we are california light.

[Fly320s]

You and me both. He has already cost us the ability to carry weapons into the Capitol gallery, well him and some of his friends.

Duster boy:

Why the fudge is he walking with his rifle at low ready?  (Close enough to low ready)  He wouldn't walk around with a pistol like that.

[BobR]

Why the fudge is he walking with his rifle at low ready?  (Close enough to low ready)  He wouldn't walk around with a pistol like that.

It's a pistol. And he is a moron.



bob

[Perd Hapley]

Why the fudge is he walking with his rifle at low ready?  (Close enough to low ready)  He wouldn't walk around with a pistol like that.

Is he posing for a picture?

[Hawkmoon]

We used to have a really nice plaza in front of the Federal courthouse where you could just sit and enjoy whatever while armed in downtown Spokane. Since this guy showed up with his AK a federal judge ruled that the federal property for firearms exclusion extends out to the sidewalk. :(

Someone needs to dispute that. The federal law prohibits firearms "in" federal facilities, and it clearly defines "facilities" as buildings where federal employees are routinely present for work.

[Northwoods]

I would say slim to none, but it will take a lot of people voicing their displeasure at the bill to make that happen.

Already did my part by submitting a comment online in opposition.

[Perd Hapley]

Someone needs to dispute that. The federal law prohibits firearms "in" federal facilities, and it clearly defines "facilities" as buildings where federal employees are routinely present for work.

Surely, you don't still think that the words and definitions in laws actually mean anything at this stage, do you? 

[BobR]

Someone needs to dispute that. The federal law prohibits firearms "in" federal facilities, and it clearly defines "facilities" as buildings where federal employees are routinely present for work.

Yea, that was the very first thing that came up. They used the word "appurtenant" in the ruling. :(

http://www.waed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/announcement.pdf

bob

[RevDisk]

This is why we can't have nice things.

Ayep. If he had cleaned up, worn nice clothing, and had it in a holster, it'd send at a minimum a neutral message. Looking crazy and carrying a weapon in a visually hostile manner?

*facepalm*

There's more than a couple folks on our side that would best serve RKBA and the Second Amendment by defecting to the other side.

[tokugawa]

Ayep. If he had cleaned up, worn nice clothing, and had it in a holster, it'd send at a minimum a neutral message. Looking crazy and carrying a weapon in a visually hostile manner?

*facepalm*

There's more than a couple folks on our side that would best serve RKBA and the Second Amendment by defecting to the other side.

 Truth.  I tried to participate in another firearms and hunting site and got run off by a collection of asses who immediately, on my first post, decided I was a old troll under a new name. Nothing would convince them, and the general level of discourse made me feel like I was back in Jr High school.

[tokugawa]

 Apparently the Dems have just introduced a 5 cent per round ammo tax here too, attempting to capitalize on the Seattle gun tax that passed.

[Scout26]

There's more than a couple folks on our side that would best serve RKBA and the Second Amendment by defecting to the other side.

^^^THIS.

It's what's Tam calls "Carrying At You" and the Tactifools in camo and hunting gear that make the rest of us look bad.  The best thing to do is dress as "normal people" and carry (either concealed or open).

[Ben]

^^^THIS.

It's what's Tam calls "Carrying At You" and the Tactifools in camo and hunting gear that make the rest of us look bad.  The best thing to do is dress as "normal people" and carry (either concealed or open).

Indeed. We've talked about it here a lot, and we have differing opinions on it here, and it's something I've taken flak over (not here) regarding my opinion on the matter. Which is that sure, theoretically, if a guy wants to dress like a gangbanger with the droopy pants and carry, yeah, he should be able to without being judged. Or if a guy (duster boy) wants to dress like he's auditioning for a Firefly remake, theoretically, he should be able to and to not be judged.

However we are all judged by our appearance, especially if that's all people see of us (i.e., they don't know us and haven't talked to us, so don't know if we're intelligent or dumbasses). So appearance matters. Appearance matters a lot if you're attempting to show you're just Joe or Josephine ordinary citizen. It just drives me nuts that so many gun rights people show up to rallies and protests dressed like clowns and Mad Max rejects. And I'm not saying wear suits or everybody in matching Dockers. Jeans and a T-shirt can easily be "presentable" as long as the person wearing them is presentable.

[brimic]

^^^THIS.

It's what's Tam calls "Carrying At You" and the Tactifools in camo and hunting gear that make the rest of us look bad.  The best thing to do is dress as "normal people" and carry (either concealed or open).

From what I've observed in my own state, if you are protesting like an idiot at the Capitol building, your side is going to lose, because it pisses off the electorate. In my state, it wasn't Rambozo protesting, it was poop flinging (literally and figuretively) unionistas.

[T.O.M.]

Indeed. We've talked about it here a lot, and we have differing opinions on it here, and it's something I've taken flak over (not here) regarding my opinion on the matter. Which is that sure, theoretically, if a guy wants to dress like a gangbanger with the droopy pants and carry, yeah, he should be able to without being judged. Or if a guy (duster boy) wants to dress like he's auditioning for a Firefly remake, theoretically, he should be able to and to not be judged.

However we are all judged by our appearance, especially if that's all people see of us (i.e., they don't know us and haven't talked to us, so don't know if we're intelligent or dumbasses). So appearance matters. Appearance matters a lot if you're attempting to show you're just Joe or Josephine ordinary citizen. It just drives me nuts that so many gun rights people show up to rallies and protests dressed like clowns and Mad Max rejects. And I'm not saying wear suits or everybody in matching Dockers. Jeans and a T-shirt can easily be "presentable" as long as the person wearing them is presentable.

I've seen a few guys OC here in Ohio.  In line at Wendys.  Wearing jeans and a t-shirt, golf shirt and Dockers...things like that.  Honestly, if I wasn't a gun person, I wouldn't have paid any attention to the piece on their hip.  But if I saw a guy walking like Duster Boy at low-ready with some type of M-4gery kind of thing, I'm probably going to get the hell out of there. 

Ben's right.  You can dress like a Naval Special Warfare Green Beret Recon Ranger all you want.  But just because you can doesn't mean you should.  Especially if you're trying to draw attention to 2A issues, making an argument that as a gun nut, you aren't a nut with a gun.  Too many people paint us with that kind of broad brush stroke to negate the message we try to convey.  No sense helping them.