I-1639 mega thread

[konradcountry]

What if you have a gun stolen from your house and you don't even know it's gone? I could see that happening.

By the way, Whitman county voted for 1639, so it's not just the Westside and Spokane.

80% receivers.

Shhhhhhhhh. The idiots that wrote this bill didn't consider those.

[Oh Mah]

So just to be sure,You now have to attend a gun ownership safety class before you can purchase your next firearm?

What about the firearms already owned?

[Stein]

One easy way to do that would be to slightly amend 1639 to include semi-auto rifles "or other semi-auto firearms capable of being modified to fit the definition of assault weapon through the use of commercially available parts or components."  Most, if not virtually all semi-auto shotguns have factory or aftermarket rifled barrels available which I believe would qualify them as assault rifles.  If so, it isn't clear what happens if you have both barrels for a shotgun, is it only an assault rifle if the rifled barrel is installed, or by simply owning one do you have an assault rifle?

[Fl0und3rz]

Gun owners should be looking for realistic ways to stop mass shootings and gun violence.  I agree that it's generally a mental health issue, I also think it's a masculinity issue. 

None of us should be surprised that the initiative passed.  We will see more restrictions in the future and would be smart to get ahead of that through legislation rather than another initiative. 

That is an elusive solution.  This went by initiative, exactly because the legislature didn't want any of their fingerprints on it.  It's all fine to propose legislation as a correction for bad initiatives purchased by people as their own pet legislative priority.  I-594 is still standing.  This is and never was intended to be about mental health and gun safety.  That was just the selling point.

[Bob33]

What if you have a gun stolen from your house and you don't even know it's gone? I could see that happening.

By the way, Whitman county voted for 1639, so it's not just the Westside and Spokane.

If you report it stolen within five days of knowing it was stolen, you should be exempt from consequences if the law is followed as written.

[Stein]

So just to be sure,You now have to attend a gun ownership safety class before you can purchase your next firearm?

What about the firearms already owned?

Grandfathered.  You need to have attended a class in the last five years that provided a certificate that indicates under penalty of perjury that the class covers the minimum requirements in the bill.  The class must also be provided by a nationally recognized organization or an instructor that has nationally recognized credentials.

So, you either need to take a new NRA class or similar, or convince you last instructor to re-issue a certificate meeting the above.

[Fl0und3rz]

What if you have a gun stolen from your house and you don't even know it's gone? I could see that happening.

By the way, Whitman county voted for 1639, so it's not just the Westside and Spokane.

If you report it stolen within five days of knowing it was stolen, you should be exempt from consequences if the law is followed as written.

Except for the "reasonably should have known" part.  This is standard verbiage for imputing knowledge to you when you say "I did not know" of a fact.  It is called constructive knowledge and it is a standard process in law enforcement. 

People should not downplay that this could eviscerate any reporting safe-harbor that implies you could still report five days after you did actually discover the fact of the stolen firearm.  I forget the case, but there was a federal firearms prosecution where a guy was prosecuted for selling to a prohibited possessor (illegal alien, as I recall), because he "reasonably should have known" that the buyer was a prohibited possessor.

So this is not just in the realm of fantasy, as some would have you believe.  It is smack dab in the middle of reality.

[jaymark6655]

I like the language of “prohibited person” in the storage requirement what the heck does that mean? Way to vague against 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments

Not vague at all.

Per the initiative, "prohibited person" means a person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under state or federal law.

What about 594? Registered to one person, but someone else has access?

Prohibited person is any person who can't possess a firearm whether it be because their a felon, underage, etc. Not a person who can't possess your firearm because you haven't legally transferred it to them yet (assuming they can legally possess a gun).

That would be the preferred way of interpreting it, but not what it says. "Prohibited person according to state law or federal law", if 594 is a state law it applies to people that cannot possess under it.

[Cab]

So now with the "training" that is required within the last 5 years to buy semi-auto rifles does that mean you have to take training every 5 years now? or you have to have had within every time you want to buy one?! this is bonkers

[KFhunter]

Not all thefts get reported, especially between family members and tweekers. I wonder how many guns are used in crimes having been stolen from law abiding good people AND not reported to LE? 
I bet literally none, which really isnt the point is it. Law abiding people already report theft of weapons.

sent from the telephone

[Stein]

So now with the "training" that is required within the last 5 years to buy semi-auto rifles does that mean you have to take training every 5 years now? or you have to have had within every time you want to buy one?! this is bonkers

Every time you want to buy one you have to produce a valid certificate.  I bet that no existing certificates will work as they don't reference the minimums in this new law.

[JimmyHoffa]

Gun owners should be looking for realistic ways to stop mass shootings and gun violence.  I agree that it's generally a mental health issue, I also think it's a masculinity issue. 

None of us should be surprised that the initiative passed.  We will see more restrictions in the future and would be smart to get ahead of that through legislation rather than another initiative. 

That is an elusive solution.  This went by initiative, exactly because the legislature didn't want any of their fingerprints on it.  It's all fine to propose legislation as a correction for bad initiatives purchased by people as their own pet legislative priority.  I-594 is still standing.  This is and never was intended to be about mental health and gun safety.  That was just the selling point.

  Guns are now part of political identity.  Republicans enjoy the almost guaranteed votes of high turnout group of single issue voters known as gun owners.  The Dems need to shrink this group to be insignificant in elections.  Make it so burdensome to become a gunowner and eventually only a small group will remain and their votes mean little.  Then the Dems can have an easier time enriching their big donors.

[Bob33]

So just to be sure,You now have to attend a gun ownership safety class before you can purchase your next firearm?

What about the firearms already owned?

This training requirement applies only to "semiautomatic assault rifles".

[Stein]

What if you have a gun stolen from your house and you don't even know it's gone? I could see that happening.

By the way, Whitman county voted for 1639, so it's not just the Westside and Spokane.

80% receivers.

Shhhhhhhhh. The idiots that wrote this bill didn't consider those.

80% receivers are semi-automatic assault rifles under this bill I believe.  I didn't see anything requiring the firearm to be complete - similar to the federal laws.

[jrebel]

None of this is inforceable!!!  Every law enforcement officer I know has said this is just silly.  It is why it had wide spread dissaproval from all Law Enforcement in Washington. 

At the end of the day it will make new purchases a pain in the arse because....which is ultimately what they wanted.  Business as usual......It will get thrown out of court the first time they try to hold a homeowner accountable for a stolen gun.   It will cost a lot of money....(again an intended consequence of the libs)....but it will not go anywhere.  Simple defense.....a car gets stolen and kills someone in a high speed chase that insues......is the car owner responsible.  What about my machette, hammer, bat, etc get stolen.....Am I responsible.  No differnece.