Washington Senate Bill 5737

Posted by : Brian | On : February 18, 2013

Somehow I have yet to talk about guns on my blog (unless you count a video about shooting cops), which is very interesting. I’m not sure why, because I like them and think they are very important. Here’s something that you should at least know about.

Washington State Senate Bill 5737 (SB 5737)

This bill is your feel-good legislation in response to the national outcry against gun violence. Somehow, the legislators in Washington think that by banning “assault weapons” from law-abiding citizens, we will all be safer.

Because I don’t know who actually reads this thing, I don’t know where you as the reader may stand on the gun issue. Either way, this is an important bill to be aware of.

Here’s a link to the entire bill (it’s actually pretty short, it wouldn’t hurt you to read a bill, you know)

Here’s a quick summary of the main parts of this bill:

First, the definition of an “assault weapon” is any semi-automatic pistol or semi-automatic or pump-action rifle or shotgun capable of accepting a detachable magazine, and also includes – a number of things that almost every semi-auto weapon has. (Read section 1 (20) for all the info)

If you are unfamiliar with what semi-auto means, it basically means that only one round is fired for every pull of the trigger.

This bill says that you may not manufacture, possess, purchase, sell, or otherwise transfer ANY “assault weapon.” The exceptions to this are those that were legally owned prior to the bill (if signed), but in order to keep them, the weapons must be registered and remain on the person’s property or at a licensed firing range. That’s it.

Now, the good news is that the bill has a very rare chance of passing, and if it does, it will most likely be quickly seen as unconstitutional thanks to the Supreme Court caseĀ D.C. v. Heller.


Comments (2)

  1. josh said on 19-02-2013

    Don’t forget that it also “allows” for unreasonable search and seizure. Which goes back to that question about when to shoot a cop…

  2. Brian said on 19-02-2013

    It “did.” It came out in the Seattle Times about that and the creators of the bill started retracting and it became a big “Uh…oops…that shouldn’t be in there” thing.

    I do find it interesting that their biggest problem with the “mistake” was that it would make it near impossible to pass the ban.

    Here’s the link:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *