Proposed Semi-Auto firearm ban in Washington State

[enkindler]

It is time to start getting busy people.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010527541_gunban17m.html

In response to recent shooting deaths, three state lawmakers say they want to ban the sale of military-style semi-automatic weapons in Washington.

The lawmakers intend to propose the ban in the state legislative session that begins next month.

The legislation, called the Aaron Sullivan Public Safety and Police Protection Bill, would prohibit the sale of such weapons to private citizens and require current owners to pass background checks.

It is named for Aaron Sullivan, 18, who was fatally shot last July in Seattle's Leschi neighborhood, allegedly with an assault-style weapon.

Supporters say they also are motivated by the Oct. 31 slaying of Seattle Police Officer Timothy Brenton and the wounding of his partner. Police believe a .223-caliber semi-automatic rifle was used then.

The bill is backed by Seattle's police department, spokeswoman Renee Witt said. Also pushing it is Washington Ceasefire, a nonprofit that seeks to reduce gun violence. The group plans a news conference today to announce the proposal.

The lawmakers who plan to sponsor the bill are Rep. Ross Hunter, D-Medina; Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle; and Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-Seattle.

The ban would cover semiautomatics designed for military use that are capable of rapid-fire and can hold more than 10 rounds. Semiautomatics designed for sporting or hunting purposes wouldn't be banned.

"If they're used in the army, used in the war — that's what this ban is about," said Ralph Fascitelli, the board president of Washington Ceasefire.

Dave Workman, senior editor of Gun Week, a publication of the Second Amendment Foundation in Bellevue, said such a ban would punish law-abiding citizens who own such guns.

"I don't care if my neighbor has a dozen of the things; ... as long as he's not hurting anyone or breaking any laws, leave him alone," Workman said.

He also said he doesn't consider the gun police say was used to kill Brenton an assault rifle.

advertising

Hunter knows getting the bill through the Legislature would be difficult, because of concerns about limits on gun ownership. However, he thinks the ban is necessary.

"We don't allow people to own tanks or bazookas or machine guns, and very few people think that that's an unreasonable restriction," he said.

Kohl-Welles said the lawmakers are trying to be practical and aren't suggesting guns be taken from current owners.

"What we're trying to get at is there's no place to have sales of military assault rifles or weapons in this state," she said.

She also said she doesn't believe such a ban would violate the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms.

"Did the framers of our Constitution ever envision something like a semi-automatic weapon?" she asked.

 

[steverjo]

Did the framers of our constitution envision the internet, or tv, or radio, or stupid politicians.

 

[sherman123]

"The ban would cover semiautomatics designed for military use that are CAPABLE OF RAPID FIRE and can hold more than 10 rounds. Semiautomatics designed for sporting or hunting purposes wouldn't be banned." I wonder what they mean by "rapid fire"? My revolver fires rapidly too, depending on how fast the trigger is pulled. It reminds me of the time Rosie O'donnell complained about the "tec-9 assault rifle that can fire 5 shots in a second" I don't live there, but I'll make sure to write a letter letting them know I'll never visit if this law is ever passed.

 

[enkindler]

As the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kline is in position to push the issue.

"The ban would cover semiautomatics designed for military use that are capable of rapid-fire and can hold more than 10 rounds. Semiautomatics designed for sporting or hunting purposes wouldn't be banned."

Officer Brenton Was killed by a KelTec SU-16CA which was never designed for military use, it is sickening that they are using his death to further their agenda.

 

[sv51macross]

A 'military-style semi-automatic' killed one officer and wounded another. A pistol killed four. Methinks that, based on your impetus for parading the ban's proposal, you're going after the wrong weapons. Not to mention that in the former incident, the style of the weapon and magazine capacity were not factors in the shooting.

[post submitted after other replies made, edited accordingly]

So, because the officer was killed by a rifle that would be exempt under the proposed legislation, they want to ban 'assault weapons'. Good gravy politicians are stupid.

 

[cjl8651]

"As criminals all follow the law, we can rest easy knowing our legislature is doing something to help. I'm glad they're not going to waste our tax money with such trivial things as keeping criminals in prison.

After all, if you can't trust a child rapist who thinks he's Jesus, who can you trust?"



Pure gold.

 

[9MMare]

I dont own any long guns nor am I interested in doing so. I do have a high capacity handgun tho. A "Military & Police" version, actually.

Throughout that original post, they say things like "they never intended this in the 2nd Amendment" and "the people shouldnt have military-type firearms."

What BS! Of course this is what was intended in 2A. A militia should/would have the latest firearms, comparable to what the govt has....that is the point!

 

[scoutsabout]

They can have them bullets first.

This is America, dammit.

.

 

[Balog]

Oh my. Time to hoist the black flag boys. Some poli-critters need to be afraid for their jobs...

 

[natman]

""Did the framers of our Constitution ever envision something like a semi-automatic weapon?" she asked."

"Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35-36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding".

Page 8. District of Columbia v. Heller US Supreme Court 2008

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf

 

[Redtail]

No such thing as a military/civilian firearms.

A gun is a gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auCPzPgTbaM

 

[Oro]

As the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kline is in position to push the issue.

I know this critter from the past. Yes, he is in a key position, but also Adam Kline is a-well known nut-job and certainly does not get what he wants in the legislature. He's fairly adept at parroting left-wing propaganda from lots of corners - anti-gun lobby, trial lawyers, eco-fringe. If you are to the left enough, he'll make your agenda his own without much trouble. He's also personally offensive to most and profane.

So, you may wonder given his position, but seeing his name on it is a big red-flag to a large number of members for that reason alone.

 

[THE DARK KNIGHT]

Well, looks like everyone's guns are safe.

"If they're used in the army, used in the war — that's what this ban is about," said Ralph Fascitelli, the board president of Washington Ceasefire.

Just gotta remind him that currently, no army is using semi-automatic Bushmaster XM-15's or WASR-10's.

"Did the framers of our Constitution ever envision something like a semi-automatic weapon?" she asked.

The logical fallacy here is just mind numbing. I don't even know where to begin...

 

[Diamondback6]

AGAIN?! Geez, last time they tried to ban 1911s as "assault weapons"...

 

[THE DARK KNIGHT]

Washington D.C. classified 1911 pistol as a "Machine Gun" pre (and post?) Heller.

 

[Bobarino]

i really doubt that this would pass if it ever hits the floor for a vote. sure Kline and Hunter are typical King County liberals but the reps from most of the rest of the state, even the Democrats, know that their constituents would boot them out of office if they voted for something like this. King and Snohomish Counties are the only ones i could see actually wanting a ban like this. Anywhere outside of those of those two, i highly doubt it.

a ban like this is floated every single year in the legislature. it never even makes it out of committee. i hope this time around is no exception.

 

[Bobarino]

Dark Knight - this is Washington STATE. not Washington DC.

 

[Beelzy]

Just another nail in the Coffin.....California first Washington next.....Coming soon to a
State near you!

Maybe yours!

Bye, Bye Miss American Pie.........Get a Belt-fed Brothers.

 

[Norinco982lover]

That is upsetting. Pretty soon they will be banning "thought crimes" ... minority report anyone?

It is basically the same thing...once they outlaw all of these weapons you will be arrested and charged with a crime...because you possessed a firearm that was capable of holding more than 10 rounds they can only assume that you are going to go on a killing spree.

 

[highorder]

Hunter knows getting the bill through the Legislature would be difficult, because of concerns about limits on gun ownership. However, he thinks the ban is necessary.

"We don't allow people to own tanks or bazookas or machine guns, and very few people think that that's an unreasonable restriction," he said.

Lie. All three of those items are legal to own.

...course you can't push legislation upon people that don't want it without a few lies.

 

[RS14]

Lie. All three of those items are legal to own.

...course you can't push legislation upon people that don't want it without a few lies.

Actually, Washington state chooses to ban machineguns. Destructive Devices are legal, I believe, and I don't know about the tank.

 

[alex_h]

"If they're used in the army, used in the war — that's what this ban is about

doesent the army also use a pump shotgun??? will these be baned next???

 

[THE DARK KNIGHT]

Dark Knight - this is Washington STATE. not Washington DC.

Yeah, I know.

 

[gatorjames85]

Did the framers of our constitution envision the internet, or tv, or radio, or stupid politicians.

I think envisioning stupid politicians was the impetus behind much of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. But seriously, I am with you; the First Amendment must not apply to TV, the Internet or Radio under these people's logic.

 

[Hokkmike]

Military Style seems to be thier key word. Very ILLOGICAL.
A stupid, stupid, stupid idea that seems silly but the voters in WA better not take it that way.