WA Senate passes bump stock ban

Ranb

Penultimate Amazing
Ranb
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
11,325
Location
WA USA
http://www.kitsapsun.com/story/news/2018/01/26/washington-senate-passes-bump-stock-ban/1069897001/
"It aligns current practices with our state laws and our state laws have never allowed for fully automatic weapons," said Democratic Sen. Kevin Van De Wege, who described himself as a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association. "Therefore, I believe our state should not allow bump stocks."
Click to expand...
Senator Van De Wege should think before he speaks. WA allowed machine guns for anyone allowed to own a gun until restrictions were placed on them in 1934 and 1994. Now, other than police and military, they're restricted to licensees who are issued a license on demand as long as they fill out the application correctly.

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/Senate Bills/5992.E.pdf
Basically the bill treats bump stocks like machine guns. The ban on making them goes into effect in July 2018, the ban on possession is on July 2019.

The votes were mostly divided on party lines. There were a few GOP yeas and at least one Democrat nay vote. The bill will go to the House where the Democrats have a small majority.

As far as I'm concerned all of the debate/motions/activity on this bill was a waste of time as it criminalizes non-violent behavior for the most part and will most likely have zero effect on crime except for those people who are foolish enough to not destroy, sell or dispose out of state their newly banned accessories.
 
Ranb said:
http://www.kitsapsun.com/story/news/2018/01/26/washington-senate-passes-bump-stock-ban/1069897001/

Senator Van De Wege should think before he speaks. WA allowed machine guns for anyone allowed to own a gun until restrictions were placed on them in 1934 and 1994. Now, other than police and military, they're restricted to licensees who are issued a license on demand as long as they fill out the application correctly.

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/Senate Bills/5992.E.pdf
Basically the bill treats bump stocks like machine guns. The ban on making them goes into effect in July 2018, the ban on possession is on July 2019.

The votes were mostly divided on party lines. There were a few GOP yeas and at least one Democrat nay vote. The bill will go to the House where the Democrats have a small majority.

As far as I'm concerned all of the debate/motions/activity on this bill was a waste of time as it criminalizes non-violent behavior for the most part and will most likely have zero effect on crime except for those people who are foolish enough to not destroy, sell or dispose out of state their newly banned accessories.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that my sister in WA can buy a machine/fully auto gun if she fills out the paperwork correctly? If so I need to let her know!
 
Last edited:
thaiboxerken said:
I see. Then I agree with the legislation.
Click to expand...
What effect do you think it will have on crime in WA? Do you think it could save anyone's life at all?

If bump stocks were banned in NV I don't think they would have made a difference.
 
Ranb said:
What effect do you think it will have on crime in WA? Do you think it could save anyone's life at all?

If bump stocks were banned in NV I don't think they would have made a difference.
Click to expand...

The ability to shoot rapidly is unnecessary unless one wants to kill many people.
 
thaiboxerken said:
The ability to shoot rapidly is unnecessary unless one wants to kill many people.
Click to expand...
A bump stock is not required if one wants to shoot rapidly. A person can bump fire a semi-auto without a bump fire stock or legally modify the gun to shoot full-auto.

I think you're being evasive. What effect do you think it will have on crime in WA? Do you think it could save anyone's life at all?
 
Bump stock makes it easier to shoot faster, that's what your link says. I don't think it would reduce crime. I think it would reduce a person's ability to kill large amounts of people. I don't think I care about your right to shoot lots of bullets in a short amount of time.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Bump stock makes it easier to shoot faster, that's what your link says.
Click to expand...
Remember when I referred to your tendency to ignore evidence that was presented to you? You're doing it again. The Wikipedia link describes bump firing in detail; without using a bump fire stock. It also describes bump stocks.

I don't think it would reduce crime.
Click to expand...
Okay, then why waste time worrying about it in the Senate?

I think it would reduce a person's ability to kill large amounts of people.
Click to expand...
Knowing a person can bump fire rapidly without a bump fire stock, how is banning them going to reduce their ability to fire faster and kill large amounts of people?

I don't think I care about your right to shoot lots of bullets in a short amount of time.
Click to expand...
I know you don't, but that can be a topic for another time. This topic was about the stupid waste of time that is the attempt to ban bump fire stocks. You don't need to make it about me and my rights.
 
I will add that machine guns, flame throwers and nuclear weapons in the possession of a harmless person will do no damage. Doesn't mean that these weapons shouldn't be banned.
 
BStrong said:
And gun control supporters wonder why gun owners don't support gun control proposals when any proposed statute is "another step in the right direction."
Click to expand...

And gun rights advocates mostly seem to think that *no* control is a step in the right direction.

The counter argument is that restricting bump stocks will not deter crime, or deter bad folk from using them. Of course, that's true. Just as it's true that the admonition against terrorists using a tactical nuke they might 'obtain' against a city will not dissuade them if the opportunity should arise.

But in the latter instance a mighty effort is expended against such an eventuality. We see it to be a worthwhile endeavour to keep tactical nukes out of the hands of the unauthorized.

And so it should be for other devices whole principal role is the rapid dispatch of souls to their maker.

Ya gotta start *somewhere*, if the nation is to advance into the 20th century (let alone the 21st) along with all other developed--and many less developed--nations.
 
BStrong, what actions or laws do you believe would improve the dreadful record of the USA when it comes to gun deaths and injuries? Do you accept that there are some laws or actions that could be taken up that would improve the horrendous statistic of almost 1 mass shooting a day in the nation? This seems to be the problem for your country - on one side no action is strong enough and on the other any action is too strong.
 
Parsman said:
BStrong, what actions or laws do you believe would improve the dreadful record of the USA when it comes to gun deaths and injuries? Do you accept that there are some laws or actions that could be taken up that would improve the horrendous statistic of almost 1 mass shooting a day in the nation? This seems to be the problem for your country - on one side no action is strong enough and on the other any action is too strong.
Click to expand...

Of course gun control would reduce gun violence. That isn't a good enough reason to support those laws.
 
It's only a fringe of gun owners impacted and really, why do they matter? It's hard to generate sympathy for people who don't mind when entire classrooms of first grader get shot just so they can enjoy their hobby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom