Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Please Stand-Up and Make Your Voices Heard!

A group of four State Senators has introduced Senate Bill 6396, legislation that would bring California-style gun-control to the Northwest and ultimately ban many semi-automatic firearms commonly owned by Washingtonians.

This legislation would establish far-reaching restrictions on semi-automatic firearms (dubbing them "assault weapons") and ammunition magazines. SB6396 affects every firearm modified to conform with the now-extinct Clinton Gun-Ban plus many other semi-automatic firearms that have no lineage to those rifles or any military-style orientation whatsoever.

Like the failed Clinton Gun-Ban that sunset in 2004, this bill is about demonizing certain firearms based on how they look, not about crime fighting. This gun ban scheme will only punish law-abiding citizens and will do nothing to curb crime or keep criminals from obtaining firearms illegally. This is simply another attack on our Second Amendment rights in Washington State.

Please contact both of your State Representatives and your State Senator TODAY at 800-562-6000 and politely urge them to oppose SB6396. More contact information for your legislators can be found here.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/read.aspx?id=5293

Chelan sheriff: Gun laws can’t stop killers
By DEE RIGGS

The Wenatchee World
W E NAT C H E E — Maurice Clemmons, who gunned down four Lakewood police officers Nov. 29, was an evil man and no changes in gun laws are going to prevent murders like he committed.

That is a conclusion that Chelan County Sheriff Mike Harum said he came to while serving on a panel of law enforcement officers looking into the shootings.

He was appointed by Gov. Chris Gregoire to a panel that was asked to determine if changes in state laws might have prevented the murders, or if any changes could prevent similar murders in the future.

“Our fear was that if a legislator has a knee-jerk reaction to this whole incident, he might come up with something that we would not be able to work with as a community,” Harum said.

The panel met Dec. 29 in Olympia. Harum was the only law enforcement officer from North Central Washington on the eightmember panel.

Harum said he has heard rumors that some legislators want to ban assault weapons and others want to require that all guns be registered.

“Maurice Clemmons violated many firearms laws before he murdered the officers, so it seems rather dubious to argue additional laws might have prevented this tragedy,” Harum said.

He noted that the gun Clemmons used in the murder was stolen, and that he stole a gun from a police officer during the shooting rampage.

“If people talk about registering every firearm in the state of Washington, that’s going to put a tremendous burden on law enforcement, and won’t do anything to solve the problem,” Harum said, noting criminals will continue to get their weapons illegally.

Harum called Clemmons “a very evil person” and said, “You have to put total responsibility on him for what he did. ... Even if we had a state-of-the-art system, it would not have prevented him from killing.”

Maurice Clemmons was under supervision by the state Department of Corrections when authorities say he shot and killed four Lakewood officers at a coffee shop before the start of their shifts. Clemmons was shot and killed by police after a two-day manhunt.

His parole from Arkansas had been transferred to Washington state, where he was living at the time of the murders.

Harum said the members of the review panel agreed with him that any changes in the system would not have prevented the killings.

I would like to see some harsher penalties on violent criminals and those that assist them...

Maybe fire up ol' sparky?

I doubt another rule regarding removing fish from the water will help.

Where's all the fun & laughter being pointed at those who use the term "Gun Grabber" by certain left wing whack jobs?
Ain't too funny now is it?

And just exactly what party affiliation do those politicians that are proposing this measure belong to?

NO!... IT CAN'T BE!
SAY IT AIN'T SO.....


Jeanne Kohl-Welles

DEMOCRAT

Adam Kline

DEMOCRAT

Darlene Fairley

DEMOCRAT

Joe McDermott

DEMOCRAT

Hmmmmmm.
Just sayin....

Good job. You outted the gun grabbers. I'm sure this will fly right through like all of the others and they'll be ringing your doorbell soon.

I could revive the old thread from fourteen months ago...but I'll just say it here:

None of my guns have been grabbed yet, by anyone.

How 'bout you, Sal? Which of your guns have been grabbed?

That's what I thought.

Fish on...

Todd

and todd has shown that some guns would be really nice to grab..

No guns were literally grabbed, they just banned ALL future sales and importation into the state of California since 2000.
NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE.

It is the banning of of firearms that constitutes grabbing in my language.
Specifically my ability to purchase ANY of these SEMI -auto firearms.



California Assault Weapon Ban

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE:
CHAPTER 2.3. ROBERTI-ROOS ASSAULT WEAPONS CONTROL ACT OF 1989:
12276. As used in this chapter, "assault weapon" shall mean the following designated semiautomatic firearms:
(a)...(5) Colt AR-15 series.....
(e) The term "series" includes all other models that are only variations, with minor differences, of those models listed in subdivision (a), regardless of the manufacturer.
12276.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following:
(1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(A) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
(B) A thumbhole stock.
(C) A folding or telescoping stock.
(D) A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
(E) A flash suppressor.
(F) A forward pistol grip.
(2) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(3) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.
(d) The following definitions shall apply under this section:
(1) "Magazine" shall mean any ammunition feeding device.
(2) "Capacity to accept more than 10 rounds" shall mean capable of accommodating more than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include a feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.



I've never been much on handguns or "black rifles", but the 2/A ain't about hunting.


Think this can't happen in Washington?
Think again guys.

They don't need to outlaw guns of any sort when they can always just yank ammo off the shelves at a moments notice.

One, it ain't likely to happen.

Two, I like it when Aunty calls someone a lunatic...it's like a turd telling a skunk that it smells bad.

Fish on...

Todd

No one needs to take my word for it...they just need to put any announcement from the NRA in it's proper place...which is usually "98% full of crap"...and pull their heads out of their asses.

Fish on...

Todd

Playing Devil's Advocate here for a second, but under that line of thinking, FP, we should be able to buy tanks and RPG's...if we're using them to defend ourselves.

Are you saying you are utterly unable to defend yourself without the types of guns they are looking to restrict in this legislation, and therefore are having your rights under the WA State Constitution infringed?

Fish on...

Todd

So, according to the CA code that Salmonella posted, it boils down to this: you can't have a weapon with a removable magazine, a fixed magazine that holds over 9 rounds, or a weapon shorter than 30".

Hell, you can have a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, a folding or telescoping stock, and a flash suppressor. You just can't have one of those and a removable magazine on the same weapon. So why's the removable magazine so damned important to you? Or one that holds more than 9 rounds? Too lazy to reload? Afraid the targets are gonna run away? Can't afford a bigger rifle rack for your hoopdee?

Actually, we are allowed to purchase tanks and destructive devices, providing we live in the proper state and have the correct tax stamps.

Was BS the 5th Village Person?

Please Don't free the Big Stick

That's an icky landing strip.

Somebody needs a visit with their Man groomer. Mangroomer.com.

We can also own supressors and other NFA items in Washington, just can't use the supressors. Had to have owned the NFA stuff prior to 19XX, and if it is in a trust, as most are, its easy to add trustees. $350 and a $200 tax stamp will get you a decent supressor. Just need a few more to round out the collection. Oh well, I go to AK and Idaho often enough to give them a workout.

Yet another silly Washington law.

Piker, hardly. Just call before you come over when the SHTF.