What's new
By:
Filters

Welcome to Washifornia

PAE said:
So 9th circus does not cover Washington ?

They just ruled that the magazine ban waznt constitutional.
Click to expand...

Neither are the recent bills they made that requires you to be 21 to purchase a "semi automatic assault weapon".

They shit all over the own states constitution.

"SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men."
 
PAE said:
Should be a precedent for Washington but dems dont like to follow the rules.
https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-ne...b3fbf5b10c5069
Click to expand...

It's not decided yet. They're appealing for a full panel decision and that hearing hasn't happened yet. Hard to say how that will go since Trump appointed a number of new judges to the Ninth. If they uphold the current decision that it's unconstitutional you'll likely see CA decide to take it to the SCOTUS just to drag it out, but it's unlikely the SCOTUS will take the case. If the Ninth does end up reversing the decision in favor of the ban, it will likely end up in the SCOTUS since there's enough conservative judges on the bench now that they don't have to risk Roberts fucking up the correct decision.

WA has nothing to lose here. They'll pass this and get a couple years of it being on the books and some will comply. Let's them use it as a talking point in future elections, but overall will be pretty pointless other than being annoying for gun owners for a couple years.
 
Sounds like a great time to buy 50 mags before this shit passes because you know those west side ****s will pass it.
 
If I had to venture a guess, this upcoming push for increased firearms legislation eventually ends up in the SCOTUS and gets shot down which gets the establishment Dems onboard with the progressives' push to expand the SCOTUS. That reality combined with the SCOTUS loving to dodge 2A cases like Neo in The Matrix, might make them turn a blind eye to the coming legal challenges though.

It's gonna be interesting.
 
Shall not be infringed.

Really. Its not hard to understand.
 
Scooterloo said:
Exactly, CA took the inch, and then the mile, and now it it happening in other states.....YOU'RE NEXT DUMBASS!!!!!
Click to expand...

I am willing to stand up for my state and federal constitutional rights. If you weren't and turned your shit in thats fine, the world needs gentiles as well.:flipoff2: Each of us has to make their own choices.
 
it's fun that they redefined "assault weapon" to be any semi-auto rifle in this state a year or two ago. really brings a whole new meaning to Assault Weapon Ban
 
KarlVP said:
Looks like we will just have to buy our shit in Idaho or Montana.
Click to expand...

Till they follow Nevada's you don't live here thing!


oh and
the denizens of Sacramento don't need and reality when writing gun lawz...
Look up "assault weapon" in the atf'$ 1968 gun control act (I may be off on line and date).
not a lotta "semi auto" shit in uncle sams stash!
 
Last edited:
Clb said:
Till they follow Nevada's you don't live here thing!


oh and
the denizens of Sacramento don't need and reality when writing gun lawz...
Look up "assault weapon" in the atf'$ 1968 gun control act (I may be off on line and date).
not a lotta "semi auto" shit in uncle sams stash!
Click to expand...

I-1639 is so fucking stupidly restrictive regarding purchases that the feds actually allowed Washington to preform their own BGC and not need the NCIS I believe. Haven’t bought a gun since then so cant confirm from first hand experience.
 
Thefishguy77 said:
I-1639 is so fucking stupidly restrictive regarding purchases that the feds actually allowed Washington to preform their own BGC and not need the NCIS I believe. Haven’t bought a gun since then so cant confirm from first hand experience.
Click to expand...

the feds didn't "allow" they refused to support :laughing:
 
Thefishguy77 said:
I-1639 is so fucking stupidly restrictive regarding purchases that the feds actually allowed Washington to preform their own BGC and not need the NCIS I believe. Haven’t bought a gun since then so cant confirm from first hand experience.
Click to expand...

They still call NICS. Even for transfers now.
 
KarlVP said:
They still call NICS. Even for transfers now.
Click to expand...
Good to know. I probably Heard fake news after 1639 passed. Dont really need anything new. Few wants but they are low level wants. Trying to throw money at something I can wheel and its fucking hard to find money with kids as we all know:crybaby2:
 
Thefishguy77 said:
Good to know. I probably Heard fake news after 1639 passed. Dont really need anything new. Few wants but they are low level wants. Trying to throw money at something I can wheel and its fucking hard to find money with kids as we all know:crybaby2:
Click to expand...

it's the medical whatever background check nonsense where the feds said "not our problem" so everything goes to the sheriff, who then just sits on it during the waiting period until it is released. basically, it is an unenforceable mandate that does nothing but add cost and time to the process
 
Roc Doc said:
Are you saying Nevada retailers are asking for ID to purchase magazines?
Click to expand...

Seems like last time I heard ammo\ect was an affirmative...
I know no gun sales are possible last I heard (2yrs back?)
 
east_beast said:
If I had to venture a guess, this upcoming push for increased firearms legislation eventually ends up in the SCOTUS and gets shot down which gets the establishment Dems onboard with the progressives' push to expand the SCOTUS. That reality combined with the SCOTUS loving to dodge 2A cases like Neo in The Matrix, might make them turn a blind eye to the coming legal challenges though.

It's gonna be interesting.
Click to expand...

So supposedly Thomas has been the deciding factor in turning away 2A cases because he doesn't trust Roberts and didn't want to risk bad rulings. With Barrett on the bench now that's no longer an issue.
 
Clb said:
Seems like last time I heard ammo\ect was an affirmative...
I know no gun sales are possible last I heard (2yrs back?)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't know the veracity of those stories. Of course you can't take possession of a firearm if you're not a resident of the state where you're doing the purchase, but non firearms should be GTG. Heard some BS about CHP stopping cars coming from Reno and asking about ammo/magazine purchases, but again, I haven't heard it from someone I trust.
 
Yea same boat here....
but the prk disease IS SPREADING:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh