AG Bob Ferguson unveils assault-weapons ban for Washington — and a backup plan

ag-bob-ferguson

AG Ferguson working hard to protect your Second Amendment rights…

I’m so glad I now reside in Oklahoma instead of Washington state!

From Seattle Times: Attorney General Bob Ferguson proposed legislation on Monday that would ban the sale of assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines in Washington.

Recognizing the political difficulty of such a bill, Ferguson, who announced in September that he would seek an assault-weapons ban, also released an alternative on Monday: a bill that would keep assault-style weapons legal, but would make them more difficult to buy, by raising the minimum age to legally own such a firearm and requiring them to be licensed, similar to a concealed-weapons license.

The draft bill Ferguson released Monday, the first day of the 2017 Legislature, would ban semi-automatic rifles that have a detachable magazine and a pistol grip beneath the barrel. It would also ban magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition and semi-automatic pistols with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Ferguson, a Democrat who easily won re-election in November, said the definitions of “assault weapon” used in his bill are similar to those used in laws in New York and Connecticut that withstood legal challenges. The ban would apply only to sales of such weapons, grandfathering in currently owned guns.

A second bill from Ferguson would not ban such weapons but would require them to be licensed. To get a license, a person would have to be at least 21 (rather than 18), would have to complete a gun-safety class and could not have been convicted of a felony. To buy an assault weapon, a person would need a license, an additional in-depth background check and be subject to a 10-day waiting period.

“I believe a ban on the sale of assault weapons is the right policy for Washington, and I will keep fighting for that,” Ferguson said in a prepared statement. “I’ve said from the beginning that it would be an uphill battle. My alternative represents meaningful reform that will enhance public safety now.”

Both bills will be sponsored by Sen. David Frockt, D-Seattle, among others. Frockt was one of dozens of solely Democratic lawmakers and officials at a September news conference, in which Ferguson said he’d been spurred by the July killings of three teenagers in Mukilteo.

Allen Ivanov, the shooter in the Mukilteo killings, pleaded guilty in December. Ivanov, then 19, had, according to police, legally purchased an AR-15 — a common assault-style weapon that would be banned by Ferguson’s bill — just days before the killings. Similar weapons were used in high-profile mass shootings in Newtown, Conn.; Aurora, Colo.; San Bernardino, Calif., Dallas and Orlando, among others.

Among the supporters standing with Ferguson in September were the parents of Will Kramer, who was wounded in the Mukilteo shooting. Kramer’s parents spoke in support of an assault-weapons ban then, and his father did so again Monday. “If our current political leadership doesn’t have the will to pass a ban on the sale of assault weapons, I would support the assault weapons enhanced background check bill as an incremental step towards increasing public safety and reducing gun violence,” Paul Kramer said in a statement.

Gun-safety measures have had far more success in recent years as ballot initiatives than in the Legislature, where Republicans control the state Senate and generally oppose new restrictions on guns.

A push for universal background checks passed on the ballot in 2014 after failing in the Legislature in 2013. A process to keep guns away from people deemed dangerous — following a court order — passed on the ballot in November after previous legislative failures.

DCG

Advertisements

23 responses to “AG Bob Ferguson unveils assault-weapons ban for Washington — and a backup plan

  1. “the sky is falling and I was hit on the head by an assault weapon” Chicken Little said.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Kevin J Lankford

    Their bans, licensing, and permits, for their so-called “assault rifles” will carry about as much weight or credibility with the true Constitutionally literate citizens of these United States as their concealed carry permits. I know of some who have applied for carry permits; but I know of many more who take it for the crock and infringement they are.

    No honest person can read our Constitution and our second amendment and not acknowledge that our right to bear arms is absolute, as all civil rights, only to be denied by capital punishment or through a sentence of life in prison.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Someone ask this genius what an assault weapon is.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Also the state can’t nullify my constitutional right, then sell it back to me for a nominal fee.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The “Legal definition” was set by the Department of Defense back in the 60s or before:
      A SELECT-FIRE weapon firing an intermediate caliber cartridge and having a removable box magazine holding 30 rounds or more.
      All the pistol grip, bayonet lug, collapsible stock, and whatever is a Liberal Anti-gun invention. If it is nor “Select-fire” meaning full-auto capable it is NOT an Assault Weapon. If it is, it is legally defined as as a Machinegun for civilians and is under the National Firearms Act of 1934. Thanks to Reagan in 1986, no new NFA firearms have been allowed to be registered except for Dealers, Police, and licensed “Security Companies”.
      Congress needs to pass a bill that codifies into civilian Law the DoD definition, and repeal the 1986 ban on new registrations of NFA Class 3 firearms.
      That will stop the foolishness. Criminals have no trouble getting machineguns, they steal them from the police and govt. Or enterprising people can build them. An open bolt, full auto only machinegun is the easiest firearm to build other than a single-shot muzzle loader. See the Sten and the M-3 “Grease Gun” both manufactured in WWII for about $7 apiece at the time.

      Like

      • According to the bill, an “assault weapon” is:
        • A semi-automatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has one or more features, such as a pistol grip
        • A semi-automatic pistol, or semi-automatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds
        • A semiautomatic pistol with one or more features, such as a protruding grip for the non-trigger hand
        • A semi-automatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of fewer than 30 inches
        • A semiautomatic shotgun that has a pistol grip, folding or telescoping stock, and more
        http://mynorthwest.com/508698/washington-ag-weapon-ban/

        Like

        • Kevin J Lankford

          It is undeniable that it is pure arrogance ( as we should be able to presume that these scum are not so ignorant) that the dispute over the relevance of the defining characteristics of “assault rifle is even a matter of dispute. Such polemics have absolutely no bearing on the intent, the true purpose, or the exercising of our second amendment right. Our Constitution is clear, the rights of the people is paramount to the authority of any elected official. The true U.S. citizens must reassert that premise.

          Our second amendment right has little value if our own government, from which it is meant to give the true citizens defense from, can actually restrict our availability of the most effective means of defense.

          Liked by 1 person

        • DCG, he can call a one-horned billy goat a unicorn, but it doesn’t make it so.
          Congress needs to codify into law the original “legal” definition and be done with all the LibTARD foolishness of “Call it whatever you want to call
          it”. At least with guns. Dizzy Lizzy can still call herself an Indian, even if everyone knows better.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Anything liberals don’t like.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Impeach this SOB along with Gerry Brown and his communists destroying our State!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. NO gun laws for honest citizens would be better. Criminals don’t care one way or the other.
    In VA we had a program that put criminals in FEDERAL prison for a mandatory 5 years when caught with an illegal/stolen weapon or for a felon with a gun. Display it in a crime – 7 years – Use it in a crime 10 years. Pretty quick the crooks either quit carrying or were off the streets for 5, 7 or 10 years. Surprise! Violent crime was cut in half.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Just because Bob happily surrendered his lunch money to the school bully every day doesn’t mean the rest of us want to. Bob does not understand that shooting bad guys with high powered rifles prevents repeat offenders.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Any bets that Ferguson has armed bodyguards?

    Liked by 1 person

  8. So being an AG is he driven around and does he have guards? Just curious, I love hypocrisy.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I cannot determine if this AG has tax-payer provided private security. Good luck trying to figure it out. The RCWs are so vague, as is the reporting requirements, I’m sure.

      43.10.060
      Appointment and authority of assistants.

      The attorney general may appoint necessary assistants, who shall hold office at his or her pleasure, and who shall have the power to perform any act which the attorney general is authorized by law to perform.

      http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=43.10&full=true#43.10.060

      Like

    • And if you have the time to read through the link I provided you about the assistants the AG can assign, the docs are each over 285 and some 300 pages. Ain’t government grand?

      Like

  9. The Left Wing Freak Show that currently runs California, passed a similar law awhile back. The same politicians, that passed this similar law, continue to put convicted criminals to put criminals before they serve their sentences! These pro-criminal politicians are easy to spot. They have a (D) after there names.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. The AG is a real “pussy”. Never served in the military, hates the military and law enforcement. He needs to be voted out of office. He needs to get his money back from where ever he got his law degree. Evidently he knows nothing about the Constitution!!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s