User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/20/2012 11:26:35 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard the bill was in trouble. I like you, but that isn't cute. Really, stop the bullshit. Thanks. Really? Lighten up a bit. Power is back on, snow is melting. No reason to be so cranky. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2012 12:22:12 AM EDT
[#2]
I won't say the bill is in trouble, I will say it wasn't really going anywhere.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2012 10:27:25 PM EDT
[#3]
I've contacted my reps, but haven't heard back. Also asked everyone I know, to contact theirs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2012 9:39:25 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
I've contacted my reps, but haven't heard back. Also asked everyone I know, to contact theirs. I did as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2012 2:41:33 PM EDT
[#5]
iI just got an e-mail from representative Matt Shea, he states "I am trying to find a reason this is not coming up for a hearing." So keep up the writing to our representatives!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2012 4:40:48 PM EDT
[#6]
Just heard back from Judy Warwick on 2098. She's going to support the bill.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2012 5:35:51 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
iI just got an e-mail from representative Matt Shea, he states "I am trying to find a reason this is not coming up for a hearing." So keep up the writing to our representatives! Matt is a good guy. He worked with Blake on the suppressor legislation. Keep up the pressure. This bill will be a much harder slog than the suppressor legislation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2012 8:40:50 PM EDT
[#8]
I will not yield!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2012 11:19:41 AM EDT
[#9]
I called Katy Buck to request a meeting with the House Judiciary Chairman. I was told that since next Tuesday (1/31) is the cutoff date for bills requiring a hearing, bill 2099 will not get one. In other words, it appears to be dead for this session.
This was a surprise to me as the House cutoff calendar has not been published online at the usual link yet. http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/pages/cutoff.aspx 18 days into the session and no published calendar online; that sucks. But this is not entirely unexpected. We have the interim to re-group and get our stuff together for another try at next session. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2012 11:42:50 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
I called Katy Buck to request a meeting with the House Judiciary Chairman. I was told that since next Tuesday (1/31) is the cutoff date for bills requiring a hearing, bill 2099 will not get one. In other words, it appears to be dead for this session. This was a surprise to me as the House cutoff calendar has not been published online at the usual link yet. http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/pages/cutoff.aspx 18 days into the session and no published calendar online; that sucks. But this is not entirely unexpected. We have the interim to re-group and get our stuff together for another try at next session. Ranb That sounds like it sucks! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2012 5:37:45 PM EDT
[#11]
Well if that's what it takes, then ok!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2012 5:55:24 PM EDT
[#12]
When's next session?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2012 8:18:39 PM EDT
[#13]
Here is a good link. http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/Pages/Overview.aspx
The legislative cycle is two years long. Within that two-year cycle, there are two kinds of legislative sessions: regular sessions and extraordinary, or special, sessions. Regular sessions are mandated by the State Constitution and begin the second Monday in January each year. In the odd-numbered year, for example, 2005, the regular session is 105 days; in the even-numbered year, for example, 2006, it is 60 days. The next regular session will start January 14th 2013 and go until about the end of April. We have lots of time to prepare. The 2013 session is much longer and we will have a better chance of getting it a hearing. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2012 9:07:25 PM EDT
[#14]
Dangit thats a year, not only for the wait but enough time to draw negative attention too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2012 5:17:26 AM EDT
[#15]
What negative attention? In three years of working on the silencer bill only two legislators (both Republicans) came out in opposition of the bill in their letters to me. There is no registered SBS/SBR crime as far as I can tell in the entire state of WA. The bill has no effect on the illegally held unregistered firearms that are rarely used by criminals. We can convince our legislators that this bill is a no-brainer. The thing is we all need to contact every Representative and every Senator to tell them our views.
Here are the legislators that voted for the SBS/SBR ban back in 1994 who are still in office. Senator Tracey Eide (While in House of Representatives) Senator Tim Sheldon Senator Lisa Brown (While in House of Representatives) Senator Paull Shin Senator Karen Fraser Senator Jim Hargrove Senator Rosemary McAuliffe Senator Margarita Prentice I wrote to all of them and asked why they voted to ban these firearms. Only Sheldon (my senator) wrote back saying he had no idea why the ban was included in the 97 page bill, but he would support bill 2099 if it reached he Senate. When you write to them, be sure to ask why the ban was included, what reservations they have towards them and what crimes were committed with registered SBS/SBR that make them think civilians could not be trusted with them. It is very important to explain the difference between registered (legal) and unregistered (illegal for everyone, even police and military) SBS and SBR. They need to know that we only want to make registered SBS/SBR legal in the state and it will have no impact on the crime rate as the registers ones are not used by criminals. If anyone here is in one of these Senator's distrcits and needs help writing, please let me know, I can help draft a letter. Thanks Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2012 2:09:14 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard the bill was in trouble. I like you, but that isn't cute. Really, stop the bullshit. Thanks. Suppress the jokes? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2012 4:45:02 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard the bill was in trouble. I like you, but that isn't cute. Really, stop the bullshit. Thanks. Suppress the jokes? Cute. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2012 4:27:52 PM EDT
[#18]
What 97 page bill was this part of when it first passed?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2012 7:08:33 PM EDT
[#19]
It was bill 2319-1994. Here is a portion of the legislative intent as it pertains to firearms.
Background:
1.FIREARMS AND DANGEROUS WEAPONS. Terms such as "tidal wave," "epidemic," and "unprecedented" have been used by the media and others to describe the escalating incidence of violence in the United States, particularly violence among juveniles. In the search for solutions, attention has been drawn to the availability of firearms and the role firearms play in violence. Some commentators blame the ready availability of firearms for the tremendous personal and societal losses currently resulting from accidental or intentional misuse of firearms. Other persons are concerned restricting firearm availability will infringe upon the right of a law-abiding citizen to keep and bear arms. Washington courts have held a citizen's right to own, possess and use firearms is subject to reasonable regulation by the state under its police power. To meet the test of reasonableness, the regulation must be reasonably necessary to protect the public safety, health, morals and general welfare, and be substantially related to the legitimate ends sought. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. Immunity. The Brady Bill gives immunity to local governments and local and federal governmental employees responsible for providing information to the national instant criminal background check system for failing to prevent the sale of a firearm to a person ineligible or for preventing the sale of a firearm to a person eligible to possess a firearm. Restricted firearms. While the possession of short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns is regulated under federal law, possessing such firearms does not violate state law. Notice how SBS and SBR are not mentioned at all as the cause of crime. They are banning the firearms that are not used in crime. If they had tried to ban small handguns, there would have been an uproar. As it was, lots of people showed at the committee hearings, most likely to protest the AWB that was in the bill prior it to it being changed. No one has ever told me how banning registered SBS and SBR protected public safety. Here is the change that was made to RCW 9.41.190 Sec. 420. RCW 9.41.190 and 1982 1st ex.s. c 47 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) It is unlawful for any person to manufacture, own, buy, sell, loan, furnish, transport, or have in possession or under control, any machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle; or any part ((thereof capable of use)) designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle; or ((assembling)) to assemble or ((repairing)) repair any machine gun((: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That such limitation)), short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle. (2) This section shall not apply to: (a) Any peace officer in the discharge of official duty or traveling to or from official duty, or to any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington((: PROVIDED FURTHER, That this section does not apply to)) in the discharge of official duty or traveling to or from official duty; or (b) A person, including an employee of such person if the employee has undergone fingerprinting and a background check, who or which is exempt from or licensed under ((the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. section 5801 et seq.))) federal law, and engaged in the production, manufacture, repair, or testing of ((weapons or equipment to be used or purchased by the armed forces of the United States, and having a United States government industrial security clearance.)) machine guns, short-barreled shotguns, or short-barreled rifles: (i) To be used or purchased by the armed forces of the United States; (ii) To be used or purchased by federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement agencies; or (iii) For exportation in compliance with all applicable federal laws and regulations. (3) It shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution brought under this section that the machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle was acquired prior to the effective date of this section and is possessed in compliance with federal law. (4) Any person violating this section is guilty of a class C felony. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2012 10:38:09 AM EDT
[#20]
I was calling around trying to get a copy of the cutoff calendar; Rose at the legislative information center told me that the calendar actually has not been published yet and the actual cutoff date for bills originating in the House that need a committee hearing is Friday 2/3/12. I am trying to contact Katy Buck, Representatives Pedersen's aide, to schedule a meeting to encourage him to allow the bill a hearing.
Edited to add; Unable to talk to Buck or Pedersen today. A minor minion is in the office taking messages only. I will try again tomorrow morning. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2012 11:57:29 AM EDT
[#21]
Thanks Randy, I have taken note.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2012 2:24:26 PM EDT
[#22]
Thanks for the hard work Ranb.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2012 4:12:13 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Thanks for the hard work Ranb. ^^^^^^ |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2012 8:18:26 AM EDT
[#24]
The cuttoff calendar was finally posted online. http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/pages/cutoff.aspx
January 9, 2012 First Day of Session
February 3, 2012 Last day to read in committee reports in house of origin, except House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees. Feburary 7, 2012 Last day to read in committee reports from House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees in house of origin. February 14, 2012 Last day to consider bills in house of origin (5 p.m.). February 24, 2012 Last day to read in committee reports from opposite house, except House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees. February 27, 2012 Last day to read in opposite house committee reports from House fiscal committees and Senate Ways & Means and Transportation committees. March 2, 2012* Last day to consider opposite house bills (5 p.m.) (except initiatives and alternatives to initiatives, budgets and matters necessary to implement budgets, differences between the houses, and matters incident to the interim and closing of the session). March 8, 2012 Last day allowed for regular session under state constitution. February 3rd is the final day for new bills originating in the House, not January 31st as I was told last week. I called Katy Buck and was told something about a policy cutoff date that I know nothing about and do not see in the published calendar. That date was today it seems. Representative Pedersen will be available for a meeting in late March or early April. This is not the end, it took several years to get the silencer bill into committee and it is no surprize that a litte bill like this that affects a small persentage of the WA population is not getting the support that bill 6239 (gay marriage) is getting. After the hoopla over that rights bills is passed, we can get more attention for our rights bill. :) Next session is 105 days so this gives us a few more weeks to get bill 2099 into committee. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2012 12:11:28 PM EDT
[#25]
Would it help if I started saying I was born loving these things?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2012 6:51:14 PM EDT
[#26]
Unlikely. Pedersen is rather emotionless when it comes to gun control law. When asked if he thought it was fair that we could own silencers but not use them, he told me that I just had to obey the law to avoid prison.
Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2012 10:28:55 PM EDT
[#27]
Well at least that sounds like a fair person, which is better that some. I was just being a smartass BTW.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/2/2012 11:00:14 AM EDT
[#28]
For Snohomish who have expressed support for 2098
Sen. Steve Hobbs Rep. Mike Hope Ignored and no response: Rep. Hans Dunshee |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/2/2012 1:16:58 PM EDT
[#29]
Dunshee voted for the silencer use bill. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1016&year=2011 Keep working on him until he takes a position.
Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2012 10:43:34 AM EDT
[#30]
So is this dead?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2012 10:51:46 AM EDT
[#31]
Dead? Yes and no. For this session yes, the bill was tabled. For next session, definately not. People are starting to take interest in this, so the best response for you is to keep in touch with your representatives and make sure they know very well your concerns and interests. This is going to be a tougher deal than the suppressor bill was, that just means more work from fewer people.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2012 1:45:39 AM EDT
[#32]
Also it's worth noting that Rob McKenna is a vocal supporter of gun rights, so if he gets elected, this could be a easier to do next year.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2012 9:22:10 AM EDT
[#33]
I plan on visiting some Senators in the spring after the session ends. Meeting your local Senator is an easy thing to do, after you have done it once. Most of them are rather down to earth people that earn a living apart from their work in the legislature.
I need people in their districts to help set up the meeting and accompany me to ensure they will take the meeting. Eide (Federal Way) Shin (Edmonds) Fraser (Olympia) Hargrove (Hoquiam) McAuliffe (Bothel) Prentice (Renton) I will not be able to visit Senator Brown (Spokane) as it is rather far to drive from the Seattle area. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2012 8:43:40 PM EDT
[#34]
I can assist with the Kent-Auburn area if needed. I also can cross post to subguns and facebook's NFA page.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2012 9:33:46 PM EDT
[#35]
I might be able to help with one area. IM'ing
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2012 2:32:18 PM EDT
[#36]
I know I am coming into this late but, Why are sbr's and sbs's regulated more than a standard rifle anyway?
More concealable? More deadly? anything? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2012 3:00:57 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
I know I am coming into this late but, Why are sbr's and sbs's regulated more than a standard rifle anyway? More concealable? More deadly? anything? People that make the laws base things off of movies. They are able to be concealed easier so they banned them. Because criminals follow laws. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2012 3:56:01 PM EDT
[#38]
seems silly to me. you would think if you can have a cpl you can have an sbr?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2012 7:38:55 PM EDT
[#39]
Seems a logical point to make that an SBR would not be a viable WA CCW because of the wording of our permits. Concealed Pistol Lisence. Doesn't seem to allow rifle carry.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2012 10:38:04 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
I know I am coming into this late but, Why are sbr's and sbs's regulated more than a standard rifle anyway? More concealable? More deadly? anything? It was a product of prohibition in the '30's, the government decided that a $200 tax stamp would be enough to deter bootleggers and gangsters from getting their SBS's, SBR's, machine guns, silencers, etc. so the National Firearms Act of 1934 was passed. At the time, a Thompson submachine gun sold for $50, so a tax stamp that cost 4x that of the gun was sufficient. It was really nothing but an attempt to inconvenience gun owners and the government could say "we're doing something." Unfortunately, when prohibition was amended, the NFA was not, and we still have this unconstitutional law on the books. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 5:32:16 AM EDT
[#41]
I wrote another round of letters to the counties that did not respond last year. I have data from 21 counties now. I corrected a mistake in my calculations and I figure 5 SBS/SBR crimes a year for the entire state. I will have the data on CD for anyone who wants it soon.
Adams CountyAsotin County1-2002, 1-2004, 1-2005 2 assaults, 1 possesion
Benton County1-1998, 2-2001, 1-2005, 1-2008, 1-2009, 1-2010 1 murder, 3 drugs, 3 theft, 1 possesion Chelan County Unable to identify which crimes are SBS/SBR Clallam County 1999-2011 24 violations of 9.41.190 listed, no SBS/SBR identified or used in crimes. Clark County Columbia County Cowlitz County Can not search for only SBS/SBR. 26 weapons violations in 2010. Douglas County 2005-2011 No SBS/SBR crime Ferry County 1994 - 2012 No SBS/SBR crime Franklin County Awaiting responce Garfield County No records of SBS/SBR crime Grant County Grays Harbor County No SBS/SBR violations Island County Jefferson County King County Kitsap County No violations of 9.41.190 Kittitas County Klickitat County No SBS/SBR crime from 2003 to 2011 Lewis County No SBS/SBR violations Lincoln County No SBS/SBR violations Mason County 1 SBS possession by a felon #11-07256 Okanogan County Recovered two SBS, not involved in any crimes. Unknown if registered Pacific County No SBS/SBR crime Pend Oreille County Unable to provide data. Pierce County #000081015 SBS possession, #072210744 Possible SBS possession. #092620619 burglary SBS, #992550729 possible SBS possession. #063020338 SBS Possession, #012481100 Possible short firearm #010041158 assault possible short firearm, #091320579 SBS possession #080820234 Obstruction, altered shotgun San Juan County Two SBS recovered in 2004, possession only. Case # 04-6851, 04-1969 Skagit County 3/10/04 Mossberg 500 SBS siezed #04-03466 11/7/05 SBS suicide #05-19084 3/13/11 SBS possession #11-03117 Skamania County Snohomish County Spokane County Stevens County No SBS/SBR violations Thurston County Burglary, 2008. Possessions, 3 in 2008, 3 in 2009, 2 in 2010 Wahkiakum County Walla Walla County No SBS/SBR crime 2010, 2011 Whatcom County Whitman County No reported SBS and SBR crime Yakima County 1-1993, 2-1996, 2-1998, 1-1999, 1-2001, 1-2003, 1-2006, 1-2007, 4-2008, 1-2010, 1-2011 All possession of possible unlawful firearm None of the police reports or case files indicated that any of the involved firearms were regsitered SBS or SBR. There appears to be no crime involving registered SBS or SBR in WA Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 10:58:49 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
Still no evidence of any crime associated with registered firearms. Wouldn't all of the registered one technically be illegal, hence not registered? BTW you never responded to my IM a while back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 12:11:15 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Still no evidence of any crime associated with registered firearms. Wouldn't all of the registered one technically be illegal, hence not registered? BTW you never responded to my IM a while back. Not sure what you mean. The police reports say they seized certain short barreled firearms, but never make any mention about registration; so I am assuming that they are illegally possessed unless the report says otherwise. I edited my above post to make this more clear. PM sent. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 1:07:15 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Still no evidence of any crime associated with registered firearms. Wouldn't all of the registered one technically be illegal, hence not registered? BTW you never responded to my IM a while back. Not sure what you mean. The police reports say they seized certain short barreled firearms, but never make any mention about registration; so I am assuming that they are illegally possessed unless the report says otherwise. I edited my above post to make this more clear. PM sent. Ranb What I meant was the SBS/SBR's are currently illegal in WA state, hence it skews the numbers in our favor, making it look like no registered SBS/SBR's were ever used in a crime. (Note not counting FFL's, LEO, or MIL) Unlike suppressors where people could own them, but no registered one was in a crime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 2:38:27 PM EDT
[#45]
Prior to '94 we could register and own them. No decrease, or increase in crime using registered guns since the enactment is worth noting.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 4:33:28 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
What I meant was the SBS/SBR's are currently illegal in WA state, hence it skews the numbers in our favor, making it look like no registered SBS/SBR's were ever used in a crime. (Note not counting FFL's, LEO, or MIL) Unlike suppressors where people could own them, but no registered one was in a crime. Some CLEO's are reporting no SBS/SBR crime at all, some going back farther than 1994. Others are only reporting a few years. The legislative intent of bill 2319 described firearm crime as epidemic back in 1994. I am trying to show that no one has ever heard of any registered SBS.SBR crime and that there is little unregistered SBS/SBR crime from any date. Those SBS/SBR that were registered prior to July 1994 were permitted to be kept. My research is showing that there is no evidence of their misuse. When Senator Kline tries to convince me that making sawed off shotguns legal to own will lead to their use by the criminal underworld, I will have some data to show him that he is wrong (again). :) Before I started writing to the CLEO's I have never heard of any SBS crime in WA at all. Has anyone here ever heard of any? It really is kind of rare here. Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 5:49:49 PM EDT
[#47]
Here is a draft of a summary I wrote. I need constructive criticism, bring it on.
Summary of short barreled rifle and short barreled shotgun crime in Washington State.
The legislative intent of Bill 2319-1994 described firearm crime as epidemic in the United States. The bill only mentioned short barreled rifles (SBR) and short barreled shotguns (SBS) to say they were legal in Washington State but were required to be registered with the federal government. The police, military and licensed manufacturers were allowed to possess these firearms as were those civilians who registered them with the BATFE. One end result of the passage of bill 2319-1994 was the prohibition of future civilian ownership of SBR and SBS. Washington residents that owned registered sbs and sbr prior to July 21, 1994 were allowed to keep them. Bill 2099-2012 will allow civilian ownership of SBR and SBS provided they are registered in accordance with federal law. Unregistered SBS and SBR will still be illegal to posssess. Bill 2099 only affects SBS and SBR not machine guns, and merely brings State law into line with Federal law. I wrote to each county sheriff requesting data on crimes associated with short barreled rifles and short barreled shotguns or violations of RCW 9.41.190 not involving machine guns. Twenty-three Counties responded with data, eleven reported some incidents or crimes associated with SBR and SBS. While some counties reported data or a lack of it for the years including and prior to 1994, others reported only a few years. A total of fifty-five incidents were reported. They included one murder, one suicide, two assaults, four thefts and three drug related. The rest were simple possession. All of these incidents appeared to involve unregistered sbs and sbr. I found no evidence that any of the firearms seized were legally owned and registered as required by State and Federal law. I calculated the average number of crimes associated with these firearms using the reported crimes and the population of each county. The average crime rate using data from all reporting Counties is six incidents per year for the entire state. If I use only those Counties that reported some incidents then the result is nine incidents per year. Based on the small amount of data reported, the number of incidents involving SBR and SBS per year is not meant to be very accurate, but it does show that there is little crime associated with them. Compared to other types of firearms, SBR and SBS are not frequently used by criminals. There is no evidence of legally possessed SBR and SBS associated with crime in Washington State. In my opinion amending the RCW to allow possession of short barreled shotguns and short barreled rifles will not be a threat to the public or cause an increase in the crime rate. Randall Bragge Belfair, WA [email protected] 360 440-5889 Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2012 6:34:42 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Here is a draft of a summary I wrote. I need constructive criticism, bring it on. Summary of short barreled rifle and short barreled shotgun crime in Washington State.
The legislative intent of Bill 2319-1994 described firearm crime as epidemic in the United States. The bill only mentioned short barreled rifles (sbr) and short barreled shotguns (sbs) to say they were legal in Washington State but were required to be registered with the federal government. The police, military and licensed manufacturers were allowed to possess these firearms as were those civilians who registered them with the BATFE. One end result of the passage of bill 2319-1994 was the prohibition of future civilian ownership of sbr and sbs. Washington residents that owned registered sbs and sbr prior to July 21, 1994 were allowed to keep them. Bill 2099-2012 will allow civilian ownership of sbs and sbr provided they are registered in accordance with federal law. The bill will merely bring state law in line with federal law. I wrote to each county sheriff requesting data on crimes associated with short barreled rifles and short barreled shotguns or violations of RCW 9.41.190 not involving machine guns. Twenty-three Counties responded with data, eleven reported some incidents or crimes associated with sbs and sbr. While some counties reported data or a lack of it for the years including and prior to 1994, others reported only a few years. A total of fifty-five incidents were reported. They included one murder, one suicide, two assaults, four thefts and three drug related. The rest were simple possession. All of these incidents appeared to involve unregistered sbs and sbr. I found no evidence that any of the firearms seized were legally owned and registered as required by State and Federal law. I calculated the average number of crimes associated with these firearms using the reported crimes and the population of each county. The average crime rate using data from all reporting Counties is six incidents per year for the entire state. If I use only those Counties that reported some incidents then the result is nine incidents per year. Based on the small amount of data reported, the number of incidents involving sbs and sbr per year is not meant to be very accurate, but it does show that there is little crime associated with them. Compared to other types of firearms, sbs and sbr are not frequently used by criminals. There is no evidence of legally possessed sbs and sbr associated with crime in Washington State. In my opinion amending the RCW to allow possession of short barreled shotguns and short barreled rifles will not be a threat to the public or cause an increase in the crime rate. Randall Bragge Belfair, WA [email protected] 360 440-5889 Ranb capitalize SBR and SBS each time as they are acronyms make a more obvious reference that 2098 and 2099 are not about legalizing fully automatic machine guns |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2012 6:11:14 AM EDT
[#49]
I can do that. I want to make the summary short and sweet so that it is easy to read and understand even by those people who have no experience with guns.
Ranb |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2012 8:58:33 AM EDT
[#50]
If you do find something that states that it's a SBR.. you may want to dig deeper to determine if it is a SBR and not a "pistol". People seem to assume that a short barrel pistols are SBR. Just saw a newsletter in Mill Creek stating the confiscation of drugs, guns, etc.. and they made sure to specifically mention a AK being illegal to own due to being a short barrel rifle.. the picture showed a AK pistol.
Well it's great to know that so far no major crimes with SBR/SBS. Really would like an SBR. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
