Let's Change Washington State's Silencer Laws


PDA






carnaby
January 15, 2008, 03:59 AM
As many of you know, Washington State has strange laws regarding ownership and usage of firearm sound suppressors, also known in lay terms as "silencers."

Currently, if we follow federal law, we are allowed by Washington State law to own sound suppressors (which I'll simply refer to as "suppressors" from here forward). We may also mount them on functional firearms. However, and here's the strange part, we may not actually fire any bullets through them. This is according to RCW 9.41.250(1)(c) (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.250).

I also noticed that in RCW 9.41.250(1)(b), it seems that my Buck Folding Alpha Hunter might be illegal, since it's blade "is automatically released by a spring mechanism or other mechanical device, or any knife having a blade which opens, or falls, or is ejected into position by the force of gravity, or by an outward, downward, or centrifugal thrust or movement"

But that's another problem for another day. Today, I want to address our ridiculous suppressor law. Does anyone here know how we might get the ball rolling on such a process? It's a silly law and should be dealt with sooner, rather than later. Heck, even the Europeans do better on this issue than us, and that might get us a foot in the door. I know the Finns did a study (http://guns.connect.fi/gow/highpow.html) not too long ago, and basically made suppressors over the counter items.

So let's here any and all ideas about how to get this done :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Let's Change Washington State's Silencer Laws" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
thrasher64
January 15, 2008, 04:52 AM
Sign me up!

Would love to get a can for my AR.. And be able to use it :banghead:

Ideas? nothing here yet :(

patentmike
January 16, 2008, 08:23 PM
That is a strange law.
What if, instead of using "... any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm," you were to use a device whose purpose was to stabilize the flow of gases out of the muzzle in order to increase accuracy?

carnaby
January 16, 2008, 08:27 PM
patentmike, come on up and give it a try :D

Upriver
January 16, 2008, 09:38 PM
You might start by inquiring with Senator Hargrove about the legislation he proposed to get this changed a few years back, and why it didn't go through. Here's his contact info:

www.leg.wa.gov/senate/hargrove/

And info relating to the bill with regards to changing restrictions on firearm noise suppressors, which he introduced in 2005:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/Summary.aspx?bill=5167&year=2005

which would have amended RCW 9.41.250 to read:

(3) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any
firearm unless the suppressor is legally registered and possessed in
accordance with federal law, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW.

Yeah, it's a stupid law the way things stand. At least you can get one here, though you've gotta at least as far as Oregon or Idaho to legally use it.

MD_Willington
January 16, 2008, 10:25 PM
I'll probably get a phone call from my Rep.. I'll talk to him about it too..

yhtomit
January 16, 2008, 10:40 PM
Upriver: I like that amendment, esp. as it would essentially get WA out of the way wrt silencers / suppressors / firearm report amelioration devices* -- after all, if it's *not* in accordance w/ Fed law, there's plenty of teeth that can be snapped on your leg anyhow.

I really like the contrast with places like Finland, where (as I understand it), it's considered rude to shoot (targets at least) *without* a silencer.

timothy

* Personally I like "silencer" better than certain more pedantically Korrekt terms, which I am using this quick reply to gently mock ;)

carnaby
January 17, 2008, 02:55 AM
Thanks Upriver, I'll give him a call/email tomorrow.

patentmike
January 17, 2008, 06:11 AM
Thanks for the invitation. The range closest to me was closed down by the city due to the noise. Gas suppressors make good neighbors.

carnaby
February 5, 2008, 02:16 PM
I sent emails to my two representatives and my senator:
Dear Senators and Representatives,

I am a hunter and shooting-sports enthusiast. I also suffer from chronic
hearing problems. For these and many other reasons, I would like you to
support legislation, such as bill SB 5167 - 2005-06 sponsored by Senator
Hargrove in 2006 to simply decriminalize the use of firearm sound
suppression devices that are already legally owned.

You may or may not know that these devices are often called by the
misnomer "silencer" when they in fact do nothing of the sort. They
simply bring the sound level of a shot fired down from one that is
highly ear damaging to one that is still very loud but below levels that
cause severer ear/hearing damage.

I am a PhD. student at the UW in Aerospace engineering, and I know
something about the technology. I also know that in Europe, use of
firearm sound suppressors is considered good manners, as it decreases
the environmental and social impact of firearm noise.

In Finland, for example, they determined that legalization of firearm
sound suppressors did not encourage criminal activity of any kind, and
is very beneficial to sportsmen, the police, and anyone within earshot
of a gun blast. They specifically found that use of firearm sound
suppressors does not encourage poaching because the sound suppressor
cannot do anything to mitigate the sonic crack of a hunting bullet
traveling faster than the speed of sound (which all big-game hunting
rifle bullets do).

I encourage you to please examine this issue, and to act on future
legislation. This is not a gun-control issue, but a health and
environment issue.

I thank you for your consideration as a current and future constituent.
Just got this reply from my Representative, Jim McIntire:

Dear carnaby-Thanks for the note. To my knowledge Sen. Hargrove has not re-introduced this piece of legislation. If he does I will certainly keep your comments in mind. Do keep in touch. -Jim

So it seems that any of you living in Senator hargrove's district need to contact him to ask him to submit a new bill of this nature. Let's go people, we can make this happen!

WayneConrad
February 5, 2008, 02:25 PM
Carnaby, That email is a work of art. Well done. I'm sorry you haven't gotten any traction yet, but I wish you luck.

MD_Willington
February 5, 2008, 05:21 PM
mega mail list may not be up to date

http://www.outsourcecongress.org/outsource/congress/schstaffers.html

LAR-15
February 5, 2008, 08:33 PM
The WA law also seems to make it illegal for law enforcement to use silencers as well.

MD_Willington
February 6, 2008, 11:53 AM
cough cough animal farm cough cough

they can use them as long as they are doing the .gov's work....

Bobarino
February 6, 2008, 01:39 PM
try Senator Pam Roach. she is a great place to get something moving with regard to gun rights.

Bobby

LAR-15
February 6, 2008, 04:23 PM
they can use them as long as they are doing the .gov's work....

I really don't see how the law allows local and state law enforcement to use suppressors

Where is the le exemption? Thanks

carnaby
February 6, 2008, 05:34 PM
The law does not allow it, but I heard that the AG has said that he won't enforce it wrt. LEO.

LAR-15
February 6, 2008, 08:51 PM
Interesting.

Wonder why the Dems won't ram through an LE exception?

woodybrighton
February 7, 2008, 08:41 AM
even the British let you have a silencer for rifles anyway

Upriver
February 11, 2008, 01:11 PM
Three Reps and a Senator contacted using a variation of Carnaby's letter (nice job, BTW). Any chance someone in Jim Hargrove's district could send him a letter prompting a re-introduction?

swifteagle
February 12, 2008, 01:08 AM
It is odd that Washington will allow you to own a suppressor but not actually shoot through it. We might presume that the intent was to make it illegal for a criminal to use a suppressor to shoot his or her victim with a suppressor thereby reducing the likelihood of neighbors reporting hearing gunfire. Such a thought is absurd since a criminal willing to break the law that forbids murder will not care much about a law banning the use of a suppressor.

How about they simply change the law to say that it is a crime to commit a crime with a suppressor. That will make the Liberals happy allowing them to live in their little dreamland that criminals actually care about their stupid Nanny State legislation while allowing the lawful use of suppressors to resume.

MD_Willington
February 12, 2008, 10:34 AM
Well that's easy, you can use other things as a suppressor... so we have to regulate the device intended for suppression... can't regulate the other things you know.. LOL

Yes WA State laws are wacky... and they want to push a whole lot more onto us...

Omega113
April 16, 2008, 06:00 PM
Hey I have been reading through this thread and I have to say I am both impressed by your commitment to changing this law and baffled by the wording that this law was originally constructed.

Carnaby, if you would let me I would like to use a modified version of your letter as the base text for an online petition that could be (after all the names are collected) sent to all the senators and representatives in Washington state.

carnaby
April 16, 2008, 06:07 PM
Sounds good, Omega. Let me know what I can do to help.

Henry Bowman
April 16, 2008, 06:15 PM
Upriver:
(3) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any
firearm unless the suppressor is legally registered and possessed in
accordance with federal lawI would suggest that the amendment not include the words "...registered and..." Under current federal law, it is only "possessed in accordance with federal law" if it is registered. If federal law is changed, such as to move suppressors to Title I, then the state law would be messed up and would have to amended again in order to preserve the intent.

To all: I'd like to help. I am still licensed to practice law in WA, though I now live in Ohio and, therefore, carry no weight with legislators as a constituent.

Omega113
April 16, 2008, 06:33 PM
Henry, good thought

Carnaby, thanks man

I'm going to go ahead and draft the petition and then ill throw the link up on here

Omega113
April 16, 2008, 06:48 PM
Okay so I set up the petition on petitions online

here is the URL
http://www.petitiononline.com/suppress/petition.html

Please spread the word and lets get this changed

Omega113
April 22, 2008, 10:17 PM
Alright ladies and gentlemen we now have 10 signatures on the petition, so lets keep the momentum going, spread the word and really drive this home to our state officials!

carnaby
April 22, 2008, 11:41 PM
I'm signed up.

testar77
April 22, 2008, 11:53 PM
Make that 13 :D

Omega113
April 24, 2008, 04:00 PM
Sweet we are now up to twenty and still rocking.

nosliw
April 24, 2008, 04:13 PM
number 21

nicki
April 24, 2008, 07:17 PM
This is a example of a stupid law for sure, you can have a suppressor, but can't use it.

Here is a question, what is the penalty for using a registered silencer?

Generally the public perception is the only reason someone wants a suppressor is so that they can quitely kill someone.

What I would consider is a bill increasing penalties for the use of a silencer in a crime and provide legal exceptions for lawful use.

Using a silencer for instance would indicate premediatation to commit murder.

Does Washington state have a intiative process? Might be a way to build a functional firearms rights base by giving them something to unite on.

Nicki

Diamondback6
April 27, 2008, 03:20 AM
We do have an initiative process, but we also have a Legislature and Supreme Court actively working to subvert it every time we pass something they don't like, like a Supreme Court ruling about "they didn't know what they were voting for and we have to protect the proles from themselves." Umm, I knew exactly what I was voting for, that's why I voted for it, ya elitist scum! Ya think?!:fire:

Anyone ever been in touch with Tim Eyman? Maybe he could give us some ideas...

Jacka L Ope
April 27, 2008, 06:15 AM
#27. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a62/lakcaJLOpe/thumbs.gif

Another source of possible support may the Washington Arms Collectors. They're very active in Washington politics in support of the 2nd.

http://www.washingtonarmscollectors.org/

struckzb
April 27, 2008, 06:59 AM
I am number 28. Seems like we are going to need more help.

Diamondback6
April 27, 2008, 08:34 PM
I'm a WAC member, and while the organization's favorably disposed to the idea, our "ground-game" is almost always defensive, having to fight against the perennial "gun show loophole" and "assault weapons" crap the Democrazies are always trying to shove through.

We may be able to get some ideas, maybe access to their mailing-list and possibly an op-ed. We also should post this in GOAL-WA at Yahoo!Groups...

Omega113
April 27, 2008, 11:53 PM
Hell yes, we are now at 91 signatures and growing!!!!!!!!!

Great support people lets keep this going and really give it our all.

struckzb
April 28, 2008, 04:31 AM
Wow that jumped up a bit.:)

t3rmin
April 28, 2008, 03:07 PM
Up to the 120's now!

testar77
April 29, 2008, 12:56 AM
How many are needed?

MD_Willington
April 29, 2008, 02:13 PM
#159 !

carnaby
April 29, 2008, 02:23 PM
# 149 is Seung Cho.

Is there any way to delete obviously bogus entries? And as if suppressors would have made a difference to Cho. He wanted to kill/hurt as many as possible and then kill himself. What difference would having a suppressor have made to him? He would only have prevented the hearing damage suffered by those who survived his massacre... something I doubt he'd be interested in.

Omega113
April 29, 2008, 07:56 PM
Alright lets see if we can get this above 200 before i send it off (i would like at least 500) we are at 167 now.

And carnaby, sorry i cant get it off of there, some people just don't have any taste.

Henry Bowman
April 29, 2008, 08:47 PM
#172

struckzb
May 7, 2008, 06:41 PM
Bump! Come on fellas' we're at 200. Let's keep em comin'.:D

MrPeter
May 7, 2008, 08:18 PM
<-- # 204

It sure would make my day if this got changed. Then I wouldn't be so eager to leave WA.

Ranb
May 11, 2008, 07:41 PM
I moved from Hawaii to WA back in 1999. Since then I have built several silencers but can only use them when I travel to another state. I heard that silencer use was banned back in 1934 when some poachers were arrested and using silencers to help cover their crimes.

Back in 1994 when machine guns and short barreled rifles/shotguns were made contraband, I think they forgot to include silencers and AOW's because they thought they were already illegal. I came to this conclusion when I was trying to drum up support for a letter writing campaign to change the law banning use. I was told by a few people to keep my mouth shut as most of the Reps in Olympia did not know silencers were legal to own. Anyway, a few years ago a law sponsored by Senator Hargrove did not make it out of the Judiciary. The letters I wrote did not get any replies.

I signed the petition but am not holding my breath. Thanks. :)

Ranb

RickH
May 18, 2008, 02:15 AM
Maybe a different tack could be used. It sounds like this law makes it illegal to shoot through a tube of car tires. As discussed in this other forums thread:

http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=23982

Perhaps we could propose legalization of these tire things as a way to mitigate sound at outdoor/backyard ranges, and in a somewhat sneaky manner legalize all suppressors? Just a thought.:D

John E Davies
May 22, 2008, 11:34 AM
Hi;

I'm new to the HighRoad and I joined up so I could post in this thread. Sorry, it's going to be long.

I started a thread at Adventure Rider that links here and it has generated some interest and signatures. You can check it out here:
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334027

I wrote to Chris Marr and my other local reps and I received an interesting email today from Mr Marr's assistant, Barb Bumann. I have attached my original letter also, which is a slightly modified and lengthened version of the excellent original posted here - thanks for the help! If anyone wants to use any of the content of my letter, go ahead, but change the personal stuff please!

Would anyone like to comment on Barb's reply to me? At the very least this shows that our reps DO listen to the folks who contact them, so please send a letter ASAP. You can go here to locate your reps and send emails:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/default.aspx

I have neither the political initiative nor the free time to push this through... maybe someone here or someone you know does - talk to your buddies. I will, however, make up a flyer to post at my local range (Spokane Rifle Range) to alert members to the situation. If you folks can do the same, this might work.

John Davies
Spokane WA

____________________________________

Dear Mr. Davies,

Thank you for writing. Everything you say about this potential
legislation makes sense. However, I followed up to see what became of
SB 5167 (it was proposed before Sen. Marr was elected to office) and saw
that it only had one sponsor and never made it out of committee. This
usually indicates that it didn't have a tremendous amount of support,
either from the public or within the legislature. That doesn't
necessarily mean that people wouldn't have supported it -- had they
known about it.

Our experience in Olympia has been that legislation like this has a
better chance to succeed if there is a person or group willing to "work"
it. Do you belong to a group or organization of sport shooters that
might be willing to do the work to push a bill like this through?
Citizen activists are responsible for a tremendous amount of legislation
that gets passed in this state. A good example is the two "moms" from
Spokane who pushed through a bill last year to restore libraries in
Spokane schools, or the owners of Dry Fly Distilling in Spokane, who
worked with us to get the liquor laws changed to treat
micro-distilleries the same as micro-breweries or wineries.

Let me know if you think this issue has "legs," -- i.e. the support
locally and/or statewide for passage, and we can talk with Sen. Marr
about his recommendations for sponsorship.

Thanks again for your thoughtful email,

Barb

Barb Bumann
Legislative Assistant to
Sen. Chris Marr
6th Legislative District
360-786-7610 (Olympia)
509-456-2450 (Spokane)



-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:04 PM
To: Marr, Sen. Chris
Cc: Barlow, Rep. Don; Ahern, Rep. John
Subject: Legalize firearm suppressor use

TO: Senator Chris Marr

CC: Representative Don Barlow
Representative John Ahern

SUBJECT: Legalize firearm suppressor use

Dear Senators and Representatives,

I am a long time shooting-sports enthusiast. In spite of habitual use of
hearing protection, I suffer from chronic hearing problems (tinitus and
hearing loss), For these and many other reasons, I strongly encourage
you to support legislation, such as bill SB 5167 - 2005-06 sponsored by
Senator Hargrove in 2006, to decriminalize the use of firearm sound
suppression devices that are already legally owned.

SB 5167 would have amended RCW 9.41.250 to read:

"(3) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any
firearm <<< unless the suppressor is legally registered and possessed in
accordance with federal law >>>, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor
punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW."

You may be unaware that these devices are often incorrectly labeled as
"silencers" when they in fact do nothing of the sort. They simply reduce
the sound intensity of a shot from a level that is highly ear damaging
to one that is still very loud, but below levels that cause immediate or
long term hearing loss.

As an ex-aircraft mechanic, I understand the physics of sound
suppression. I also know that in Europe, the use of firearm sound
suppressors is simply considered good manners, since it decreases the
environmental and social impact of responsible firearm use.

In Finland, for example, studies determined that legalization of firearm
sound suppressors did not encourage criminal activity of any kind -
rather it proved very beneficial to sportsmen, the police, and anyone
within earshot of a gun blast. The study specifically reported that use
of firearm sound suppressors does not encourage poaching because a sound
suppressor cannot remove the loud sonic crack of a hunting bullet
traveling faster than the speed of sound (which is characteristic of all
big-game hunting rifle bullets).

Current Washington state law calls for fines of up to $1000 and/ or up
to 90 days in jail for using a suppressed handgun or long gun, even when
the device was legally acquired (complying with all Federal laws, and
after the buyer passed an extensive FBI background check). State law
does not, however, make possession illegal. A gun owner must travel out
of state to actually use his expensive legally acquired, legally owned
suppressor. Can you see the contradiction here?

I encourage you to please examine this issue, and to encourage and act
on future legislation. This is not a gun-control issue, but a health and
environment issue. In addition, decriminalization of the use of legally
obtained and registered suppressors could go a long way toward improving
public opinion regarding long established gun ranges throughout the
state, especially in urban areas..

As a current and future constituent, .I thank you very much for
considering and supporting this legislation.

John Davies

carnaby
May 22, 2008, 11:46 AM
That is an interesting letter. I think that if a bill actually came up that we could get more support this time around, especially with all the internet resources available to get the word out.

Write back and tell them YES!

John E Davies
May 22, 2008, 02:42 PM
I made up a flyer and petition to post on my local range bulletin board. You can see THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT here:
http://www.spokanister.net/Docs/WA_Suppressor_Law_Flyer_Petition.doc

Low resolution screen captures:

http://www.spokanister.net/images_web/Storage/WA_Suppressor_Law_Flyer_Petition-01.jpg

http://www.spokanister.net/images_web/Storage/WA_Suppressor_Law_Flyer_Petition-02.jpg

Please take a look and tell me if you think I should reword any of it. I appreciate any and all constructive comments. I want to finalize it before printing and taking to my range.

Do you think I need to add a short description of the purpose of the petition below the header, or is the title itself self-explanatory?

It's Word 2002 format - you can take the doc and use it however you want - but be SURE to add YOUR local Senator's contact info and also your own name at the bottom as a Local Contact! I don't want folks in Seattle calling me up! I blanked out my phone and email in the above pics to make sure!

The signatures need to be from inside YOUR Senators district boundaries to have any effect!!!

Please remember to pick up Petition pages as they fill up and send in COPIES (keep the originals) to the Senator's local or Olympia office, or find someone to do that for you. You can find their mailing addresses using the link I included at the bottom of Page 1. Print enough extra Petition pages so that they don't run out of space... it depends on the size of your club. Mine has nearly 1000 members so I'm going to start with 10 pages and see how it goes (there are 25 spaces per page).

Thanks - maybe this will work! If this post is inappropriate due to political content.... well, hell, I don't know where else to put it. I do think it's ok here - fixing this screwy law helps us all.

John Davies
Spokane WA

Henry Bowman
May 22, 2008, 04:48 PM
Please take a look and tell me if you think I should reword any of it.Drop "registered and" from the language of the proposed amendment.

Also, inside the first red box, they are not federal "guidelines," they are laws.

If I still resided in WA, I'd sign. :(

MrPeter
May 22, 2008, 07:01 PM
For those of you who use the social networking site FaceBook, I have created a new group to try to move some of the younger folks who may not be as exposed to places like shooting ranges and THR.

I am guessing that I have permission to rip off some letters and thoughts posted on this thread. If I don't then just let me know and I'll take it down.

John E Davies
May 22, 2008, 07:12 PM
"Legalize Supressors in Washington State" Facebook Group

Sounds great to me, but I think you should correct your spelling - two "p"s in suppressor. The more discussions, the better! However, I think it would be smart to link other discussions back to this thread to keep everything centralized. That's what I did with the one at AdvRider.com that I started a while back - I asked everyone to check in here.

I don't allow unauthorized "hot linking" (bandwidth stealing) on my personal website, so any images (like the flyer and petition above) can't be linked to directly off-site, unless I allow it. You can try, but it won't work ;) The actual document IS however downloadable from anywhere if you add a link directly to it. If you want to copy the flyer images, save them, and post them elsewhere, that's OK by me, but IMHO it would be good to get the content finalized first. Let's give it a few days for folks to comment.

John Davies
Spokane WA

give
May 22, 2008, 07:27 PM
good question,in fact i would be interested in finding out what the laws are in pa for suppressors,any ideas from anyone?

MrPeter
May 23, 2008, 03:40 PM
Sounds great to me, but I think you should correct your spelling - two "p"s in suppressor.

Oh man, I did have 2 "p's" in there! one must not have typed is all...

Nowhere else in there do I spell it wrong. GRRRR!!!!! (You can't change titles in facebook groups... :-/

I'll email their tech support and see if they can change it for me. Thanks for the heads up.

MrPeter
May 23, 2008, 03:51 PM
Ok fixed....

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=21965771250

Yellowfin
May 25, 2008, 05:14 AM
I've often wondered why discussion on the matter of deregulating suppressors is, well, silent. In lots of countries outside the US there is absolutely no obstacle to owning them there even when owning a firearm itself is horridly expensive and complicated. It is the perfect tool for getting new people to enjoy range time. Hmm...maybe is THAT why the anti gun toads work so hard to keep them out of people's hands?

I joined the Facebook group, but it's very quiet. Is that deliberate to illustrate the point?

Yellowfin
May 25, 2008, 01:44 PM
#242...man, if I could have only been one farther down. #243 would be a lot cooler. A .243 would make a great suppressed gun.

neapoi
May 25, 2008, 11:24 PM
Done. Signed.

What else can I do other than contact my representatives?

FourTeeFive
May 26, 2008, 10:24 PM
I really don't like having my name on a website associated with owning a suppressor. Any way to be anonymous? Call me paranoid, or just cautious...

John E Davies
May 27, 2008, 12:25 AM
neapoi: you can put your name on the online petition and print out a flyer and petition form, and take them to your local range(s). Talk to the range master or owner and see if they will let you post them. Send in copies of the signature pages as they fill up, to your local state representative with a short letter of explanation. Keep the originals in a file folder in case they need to be used for anything later.

FourTeeFive: I don't see why you can't use a handle instead of your real name - why don't you see if it will go through that way?

I was going to wait a while longer to see if anyone else has comments on the flyer before I print it out, but there is no reason you guys can't go ahead and use it as is. Please remember to change the Representative info and local contact info!

John Davies
Spokane WA

abates226
June 5, 2008, 12:12 AM
just a note...if using a suppressor is a misdemeanor or gross misemeanor, it will not make you a 'FELON' if convicted of it. Only a FELONY will do that. Other than that, looks great!

Aristodemus
June 6, 2008, 11:43 PM
How about:

HELL YES! I WANT TO SUPPRESS!

gun_guy
June 11, 2008, 05:37 AM
This thread is the reason I joined this forum.

Stupid law, needs to go away.

est_1980
June 17, 2008, 07:41 PM
Signed the petition... emailed Sen. Hargrove

dave_pro2a
June 18, 2008, 03:55 AM
Saw an interesting comment on opencarry

Agent 47 wrote:
Now we have, only a couple months ago, Sheriff Luvic taking office, the first time I met him he guardedly expressed his dislike of peoples gun rights and expressly said he would absolutely refuse to sign a form 4 for a silencer transfer.

In fact he has since signed a couple of them but it took a lawyer threatening to sue the department if he didn't. Luvic is a former Washington state patrol officer who's law enforcement career is centered in the time when RCW 9.41.270 was used to ban open carry.

Effectively he has been out of the loop and has missed all the progress the open carry movement has had in this state and in Snohomish county. He is imparting both his misunderstanding of the law as well as his personal dislike of RTKABA onto his deputies and in turn the deputies who share his dislike of citizens who legally carry are breaking the law with little fear of disciplinary actions coming from higher up.

Albatross
June 18, 2008, 04:11 AM
Want to get a law changed?

Author John Ross did it with a pal and 20,000 dollars.

He got his law passed by hiring a lobbyist. Do that in WA and I bet you'll have silencers double quick.

struckzb
June 19, 2008, 02:10 AM
Great. That means since about 260 people signed the petition, each of us would need to donate about 77 dollars, and then we would have 20K.:)

FourTeeFive
June 26, 2008, 12:22 PM
Want to get a law changed?

Author John Ross did it with a pal and 20,000 dollars.

He got his law passed by hiring a lobbyist. Do that in WA and I bet you'll have silencers double quick.

Considering the $200 tax stamp per suppressor I would gladly kick some money into the fund. If anyone is serious about this please let me know.

yugorpk
July 9, 2008, 01:38 PM
Yes. Silly law. Ive heard they will confiscate your silencer, gun and car you used to drive where you are shooting if you are caught using a silencer in WA.

I own 4 silencers in WA state. Three on Form 4 and one on a Form 1. Didnt get LEO signoffs on any of them. Went the trust route and I'll never do any other method.

Sure would like to have an SBR but I don't think that will ever happen.

carnaby
July 9, 2008, 01:45 PM
Yugorpk, what's involved in going that route? Is it expensive? I already tried the LEO route without success.

yugorpk
July 9, 2008, 01:58 PM
It doesnt cost anything. More or less. You do need to buy a copy of Quicken Willmaker at Office Max . Then you shuffle through the program and create yourself a revocable living trust and assign yourself as the trustee. Trusts are like corporations in that they can own property such as couches or silencers except that you do not need to register the trust with ANYONE or pay fees like a corporation. You assign a few items to it to create a trust schedule A. Then you have the entire trust notarized at kinko's. Thats it. You are now the trustee of your revocable trust and you can add or remove items from the schedule A at will . You fill out your Form 1 or Form 4 and include a copy of ALL of the trust ie the certificate of trust, the trust documents and the schedule A. Then you send copies into the ATF with your citizenship form and they approve it. Easy as that. No LEO signoff, no fingerprints, no pictures, no background check ...none of that. Trusts dont have backgrounds or fingerprints. The silencers are just a aide benefit. The real purpose of the trust is to assign property to your heirs to avoid probate when you die. Two birds with one stone.


Yeah. You'll never, ever get a signoff by the King County sheriff. Trust or corporation are your only way. When you get ready to buy try Chip Miller in Snohomish. His pricing is pretty good without the attitude like Wades.

carnaby
July 9, 2008, 02:19 PM
Thanks Yugorpk! I was planning to make my own this summer. Hopefully I can get the ball rolling in time. What's the time-frame for the Form 1 to come back from the ATF?

I also suppose I need to ask the ATF for new forms, as I doubt I'll ever see the ones from King Co. Sheriff again.

yugorpk
July 9, 2008, 02:30 PM
get on the atf website and they'll send you new forms. Trust Form 1's are running 6-11 weeks it seems. I just got a form 1 for a AK silencer back a few weeks ago and it was 11 weeks door to door. Heres my newest baby...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za174Q6OQ2M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etgzarL4ZD4)

carnaby
July 9, 2008, 02:35 PM
Nice!

struckzb
July 13, 2008, 10:02 PM
Was wondering if there are any updates on this matter?

If we ever do get the law repealed why not permanently install a suppressor to get the legal 16 inches on an SBR. I have an Hk pistol in 5.56 and it is really loud, if I could use a suppressor on it I would in a heart beat. Of course the only problem would be that it is now dedicated to that weapon.

busy_squirrel
July 14, 2008, 02:56 AM
#258





(too short)

Gray Peterson
July 14, 2008, 05:10 AM
You'll never, ever get a signoff by the King County sheriff.

You sure about that? Tell me your experiences.

hso
July 14, 2008, 08:39 AM
This has shifted into different discussions not directly related to activism. Other forums, Legal and General, would be better places for them so I'm closing this thread and encouraging you to continue in those forums.

If you enjoyed reading about "Let's Change Washington State's Silencer Laws" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!