WA Senate passes bump stock ban

[thaiboxerken]

You are correct, Lurch. One doesn't need to be accurate when spraying bullets into a crowd.

 

[Ranb]

So bump stocks degrade accuracy of fire. Their advocates decry
--nay, trumpet--this aspect, to the point of denigrating their capability as awfully inefficient as killing instruments.

I think advocate is the wrong word here. An advocate will support rather than decry.

But out the other side of their mouths claim their utility at the firing range.

Who is doing this?

 

[ponderingturtle]

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.

Yep no law can possibly do anything the only thing left is to rejoice in the uniquely american mass shooting "problem".

 

[ponderingturtle]

And yet if someone said "the blood of kids at an Arianna grande concert requires that we ban muslims ", suddenly you'd care about civil rights.

Banning people and banning guns are totally the same. Why australia committed genocide when it passed its gun laws. Worse than the holocaust that.

 

[ginjawarrior]

the fact that they are allowing them on license as and when they can be registered federally doesnt look to be the boogeyman hunt you're claiming

if it was that it would be a flat ban

WA might control bump fire stocks like MG's if the bill passes. While a MG can be registered with the feds and possessed in WA, the BATFE does not register bump stocks. This means a bump stock can't be owned by those in WA without a license.

as i said as and when they can be registered by the btfe with the other automatic weapons then you'll be perfectly fine using them in WA

maybe stop complaining about WA restricting and instead use that energy getting the BATFE to start registering bump stocks along with other full auto as they should be

 

[Lurch]

I think advocate is the wrong word here. An advocate will support rather than decry.


Who is doing this?

The decrying by the advocates is my way of saying that they want to have their cake and eat it too. On the one hand they pooh pooh the potential for harm because of awfully poor accuracy. "What killer in their right mind would hobble themselves with such a gimmicky device? So no need to regulate, and let us carry on with our orgiastic blasting away in our little make believe world?" And when a crazy like Paddock actually does harm, the refrain is, "Think how much worse it would have been with a *real* full auto arsenal!"

Well, the refrain should be, "Think how much less worse it would have been if weapons capable of high fire rates were not available?" And yeah, if necessary that includes semi-auto guns that can be handled so as to deliver a high cyclic rate without an add-on.

Does anyone have a stats--NOT including law enforcement--on the number of gunfire victims who were justifiably shot in the commission of a crime vs innocents and those otherwise unjustifiably shot? In other words, does the self defence stance hold water? Does the number of baddies taken out compensate for the number of non baddies? Is the gun used to deadly effect more often for its stated purpose of self defence than for offence against those undeserving?

It's a worthwhile question, because if it is the case that there are more illegal shootings than legal, the mentality that adopts the gun for defence makes for a larger number of guns in circulation which in turn makes for a larger number of improper uses. A death spiral, of sorts. Or MAD, if you will. And weapons that enhance the number of bullets in flight can only add to the carnage.

 

[Ranb]

as i said as and when they can be registered by the btfe with the other automatic weapons then you'll be perfectly fine using them in WA

maybe stop complaining about WA restricting and instead use that energy getting the BATFE to start registering bump stocks along with other full auto as they should be

I read the bill again and it seems that any person who is an FFL/SOT will be able to own a bump stock; registered or not.

 

[ginjawarrior]

I read the bill again and it seems that any person who is an FFL/SOT will be able to own a bump stock; registered or not.

does that mean this whole "outrage thread" is a big old nothing burger then?

 

[Cleon]

does that mean this whole "outrage thread" is a big old nothing burger then?

FFLs are registered dealers, they don't make up a large percentage of gun owners. Getting a Federal Firearm License is not trivial.

 

[Ranb]

The FFL is $200/3 years, the SOT is $1000/year. While they are issued on demand to anyone who fills out the application properly, they're still only intended for those who go into the gun business.

I used to be an FFL, not interested in obtaining another license to amass a personal collection.

 

[BrooklynBaby]

It's probably not a good idea to ban anything a lunatic uses to kill people. We won't have many legal things left at all once they are all banned. Even pillows can be used for murder most foul.

 

[Ranb]

SB 5992 gets a House hearing on the 9th. It has until 2/26 to get out of the Rules Committee and onto the House floor; 3/2 to get a vote by the House. Even numbered years are short sessions.

If it has support from the House Judiciary Committee (it does) and the Rules Committee (most likely) then it will pass. The Governor is sure to sign the bill if it passes.

 

[applecorped]

Useless legislation.

Feelz good though.

 

[PhantomWolf]

It's probably not a good idea to ban anything a lunatic uses to kill people. We won't have many legal things left at all once they are all banned. Even pillows can be used for murder most foul.

How many people can you kill with a pillow in a single event?

 

[theprestige]

How many people can you kill with a pillow in a single event?

About as many as you can kill with a pillow with a bump stock attached. Just like a semi-automatic rifle, ironically.

 

[Lurch]

Useless legislation.

Feelz good though.

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

 

[crescent]

It's probably not a good idea to ban anything a lunatic uses to kill people. We won't have many legal things left at all once they are all banned. Even pillows can be used for murder most foul.

How many people can you kill with a pillow in a single event?

I am imagining some furious man flinging pillows out the broken window of his high-rise hotel room, becoming even more furious, wondering why it does not seem to be killing anybody.

"Why doesn't it work! I thought pillows were dangerous weapons! Waahhh!!!"

 

[theprestige]

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

What thousand mile journey do you think this step embarks on? What do you think is the destination?

I ask because obviously there's no point in taking even a single step in a direction you don't want to go. So. What's the direction?

 

[PhantomWolf]

What thousand mile journey do you think this step embarks on? What do you think is the destination?

I ask because obviously there's no point in taking even a single step in a direction you don't want to go. So. What's the direction?

How about "To decrease US gun crime and mass shootings to the levels of other 1st world countries"?

 

[BStrong]

How about "To decrease US gun crime and mass shootings to the levels of other 1st world countries"?

Because just one more law will turn the tide.

Just like how penalty enhancements for crack cocaine stopped the crack epidemic dead in it's tracks.