Require Lawmakers to Pass Test Before Gun Legislation

[vandeman17]

https://www.kpq.com/bill-introduced-to-require-lawmakers-to-pass-test-before-gun-legislation/

Olympia, WA – State Sen. Phil Fortunato, R-Auburn, has introduced legislation in advance of the 2019 legislative session that would require legislators who draft gun legislation to be trained and pass a test.

 

“We have legislators drafting bills who have no idea how firearms work or any sense of firearm nomenclature,” said Fortunato. “When decision makers want to restrict someone’s constitutional rights, they shouldn’t go off half-cocked.”

 

Fortunato’s bill would require legislators who want to draft legislation to pass the state’s criminal justice firearms training for each firearm they wish to regulate. In addition to classroom and live-fire requirements, legislators would also need to pass range safety officer training, and be able to pass a knowledge test for calibers and gauges of firearms.

 

Fortunato points to actual quotes from anti-gun politicians to demonstrate the need for better education of policymakers.

 

“A weapon (AR-15) that shoots off 700 rounds in a minute.” – former U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Florida.

 

A ghost gun that “has the ability, with a .30-caliber clip, to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second; 30 magazine clip in half a second.” – California state Sen. Kevin de Leon (D).

 

“…number of these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available…” – U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colorado.

 

“We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than three rounds. And yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines.” – U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California.

 

“I guess no one told Sen. Feinstein that it’s illegal to hunt humans,” Fortunato added. “I just think that it is fair to require some competency training for legislators so they can better understand what the heck they are talking about.”

[Stein]

This assumes legislators are drafting the bills?

[JimmyHoffa]

maybe a test on the constitution first, with some emphasis on the 2a

[Fl0und3rz]

This assumes legislators are drafting the bills?

  But at least they are voting on them.

This is a mixed bag, as more knowledge could be used against the 2A.

[Stein]

Yeah, this is a non starter.  Would we require them to pass a test on medicine before voting on healthcare?  It's a pretty shaky platform to stand on.

In my mind it isn't the legislature that is the problem, it is the billionaires using the referendum process to work around our representatives who we can call up and voice our opinions to.  Given enough money, they can pass a bunch of stuff that would never clear Olympia, even given the total control by the democrats.

[Fl0und3rz]

[Blacktail Sniper]

This assumes legislators are drafting the bills?

  But at least they are voting on them.

This is a mixed bag, as more knowledge could be used against the 2A.

I think this is something that is not thought about enough.

One recent example is the arguement that background checks/limiting age on purchasing semi-auto rifles won't work or make a difference. 

If you keep telling them that, then the logistical response is, "Fine, instead of regulating who can get an AR or other semi-auto, they will just focus on attempting to remove them completely"...now you are fighting an even bigger and more critical battle. 

And once it makes it makes the ballot, and based on their successes at the polls, we know how that will go...

Just offering as a point of perspective, not trying to open a can of worms over AR's or background checks.

[Fl0und3rz]

That wasn't really my point.  The golden age of the AR came about during a time when the "AR-15" was banned by name or by feature.  The law was so shoddy and easily overcome by legal workarounds that it became a farce to leave it in place.

A similar phenomena is being raised with I-1639, because 18-21 year olds cannot buy "assault rifles" now, a term which is not legally defined until July 2019.


A little knowledge of firearms can be used against 2A supporters.

[Stein]

The golden age of the AR-15 came when the original assault weapons ban expired and they became legal to own in 2004.

[Fl0und3rz]

It was allowed to expire, because it was essentially useless as proven by all loopholes exploited by various manufacturers.  In 2008, a Colt 6920 was still $1400, retail, when you could find one.  Now, similar is almost half that.

[Stein]

It wasn’t allowed to expire, several extensions were tried and they didn’t make it out of committee due to congressional makeup at the time as well as lobbying and a bunch of people that wanted to buy them.

If we had a different congress and president it would still be in place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fl0und3rz]

They didn't renew it.  It expired. 6 in one hand, half a dozen in another.