The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 20, 2019, 05:21 AM   #26
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,959
Fair enough. In AR, we actually do call ours the FOIA. As a result, in casual conversation (as casual as conversations about the FOIA and federal law can be) one often hears reference to "FOIA" and "the federal FOIA." And I've run across FOIA references to several other states' laws over the years.

FWIW, I decided to do a little digging. It's called the Public Records Act in WA and can be found at Revised Code of Washington, 42.56.001 et seq..
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old May 20, 2019, 10:25 AM   #27
Jack Ryan
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2009
Posts: 49
The NRA is opposing this? Aren't you concerned it is just a trick for Wayne to scam a new pair of socks?

Where is GOA on this? What about all the never been a members and never gonna be a members? How about those "not another dollar until Wayne is gone" guys?

What are ya'll doing to oppose this grievous infringement?
__________________
Free men own guns. Slaves don't.
Jack Ryan is offline  
Old May 20, 2019, 11:02 AM   #28
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,207
I think this action was defeated, but I think other rules have passed.
Been too busy to check into new Washington rules. I just assume that gun ownership in WA is going to change dramatically in the next few years.
rickyrick is offline  
Old May 21, 2019, 05:13 AM   #29
Prndll
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 24, 2017
Location: Texas
Posts: 123
Quote:
What about all the never been a members and never gonna be a members? How about those "not another dollar until Wayne is gone" guys?
a) Bumpstocks are silly range toys
b) Federally Banning bumpstocks is a silly waist of good red tape
c) Creating a database of 'I used to have a bumpstock' gun owners accomplishes nothing actually worth having
d) There truly are many other things that need attention instead of focusing so much (on all sides) on this. Time and money are better spent elsewhere. It's a red herring.
e) This plays no role in any decision I might make other than choosing against such silliness, such ridiculous non-sense.

My vote with my dollar:
If we could actually focus a bit on something a bit more serious, there would not be any reason to be so paranoid about giving 'one more inch' to the anti-gun left. This is just another one in a line of let-them-eat-cake examples of twitter following twits that never seem to understand how social media is NOT a national consensus.
__________________

Texas State Rifle Association

<====Angels and ministers of grace defend us!====>
Prndll is offline  
Old May 21, 2019, 05:29 AM   #30
silvermane_1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2011
Location: Burien,WA
Posts: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
Well, there you go! With a name like that, they have GOT to be a terrorist!! No double standard here, at all!!

(yes, deliberate sarcasm)




Like the "no fly" list??
Exactly, these kinds of "lists" are completely arbitrary and capricious, and IMHO "Orwellian" in nature and purpose.
__________________
Rugers:SR1911 CMD,MK 3 .22lr 6",Sec. Six '76 liberty .357 4",SRH .480 Ruger 7.5",Mini-14 188 5.56/.233 18.5", Marlins: 795 .22lr 16.5",30aw 30-30 20",Mossberg:Mav. 88 Tact. 12 ga, 18.5",ATR 100 .270 Win. 22",S&W:SW9VE
9mm 4",Springfield:XD .357sig 4", AKs:CAI PSL-54C, WASR 10/63, WW74,SLR-106c
silvermane_1 is offline  
Old May 21, 2019, 07:57 AM   #31
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 12,449
Quote:
Federally Banning bumpstocks is a silly waist of good red tape
Sure, until they decide to use the same method to ban something I might deem important.

Remember: this was done via executive order, with no participation by the legislature. It's not so much about what was banned as how it was banned.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old May 21, 2019, 08:32 AM   #32
Prndll
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 24, 2017
Location: Texas
Posts: 123
I'm not in favor of the way it was done....at all. I've voiced my disagreement with 'the way' this entire thing has been handled via TFL from the beginning. There is not a singled aspect of bumpstocks that has been treated with the appropriate level of discernment. It has ALL been an emotional rolercoaster foisted upon us. If anything, it is a political tool at this point. Any database created is not going to be accurate or secure. It really is just a feel-good move that no one will actually be able to use. Kinda like New York wanting to tie Facebook the 2A with no regard for what happens after Facebook disappears. But that's another topic of conversation. In the grand scheme of things, VERY FEW people ever owned bumpstocks (or had even heard of them before this mess). The overwhelming percentage of gun owners would never be touched by any of this at all aside from forum discussions.

This is that 'slippery slope' the NRA was warned about when they publicly stated their opposition to these devices. The NRA gave weight and importance to something that really was nothing at all.

The man could have bought full auto M16's. He certainly had the money. But he went this route. That indicates to me that in his mental derangement, he was screwin' around with peoples' lives and ended up creating such a big mess for the entire country.

Personally, I think it would have made more sense to ignore bump stocks in the first place and move on. Frankly, I'm tired of even thinking about it.
__________________

Texas State Rifle Association

<====Angels and ministers of grace defend us!====>
Prndll is offline  
Old May 21, 2019, 11:23 AM   #33
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,518
Certainly, it would have made a lot of sense to ignore the irrelevance of bumpstocks to murder in Vegas, but good sense wasn't the loudest response to the event.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
It's not so much about what was banned as how it was banned.
That's the issue in the bumpstock ban, not whether many shooters liked the stocks. An object is subject to NFA regulation if we say it is, even if we've previously said it isn't is not anything like a real standard. If standardless regulatory fiat is fine in one matter, what would be the principled barrier to it in other matters?

Last edited by zukiphile; May 21, 2019 at 11:48 AM.
zukiphile is offline  
Old May 21, 2019, 09:04 PM   #34
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,962
Quote:
An object is subject to NFA regulation if we say it is, even if we've previously said it isn't is not anything like a real standard.
The ATF has a history of doing just that. Particularly with pistol stocks, for one example. For a long time the rule was "pistol + (attachable) stock = short barrel rifle=NFA weapon.

More than a few Lugers and others had their mounting hardware cut or ground off so a collector could own both the pistol and the stock without being NFA items.

Then the ATF decided that stocked pistols that were curio & relic were ok, non-NFA. More than a few of us with those guns got stocks, usually reproduction stocks. Then a couple decades later, ATF decided that only original period stocks qualified as exempt, so if you had an original pistol and a repro stock, it was an NFA item.

Which is one reason I find foolish those taking joy in the ATF's current ruling allowing those ridiculous "pistol braces". Enjoy it while it lasts, fellows, your turn will come...

The point here is that the Executive Branch of government decided that the previous administration's ruling was "incorrect".

Not the Judicial Branch
Not the Legislative Branch

They've done it before, and I'm confident they will do it again.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06827 seconds with 8 queries