Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Washington State Suppressor Laws

  1. #1
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-25-04
    Location
    seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,291

    Washington State Suppressor Laws

    I'm bringing this up again given that we seem to be having luck with HB 1052.

    I just sent the following to my Senator/Representatives:

    To my Washington State Senator and Representatives:

    I am writing to ask that simple legislation be enacted that would make a very simple change to RCW 9.41.250 (1). Washington State should change subsection (c) from

    "(c) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm, "

    to

    "(c) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm that is not owned and registered in accordance with federal National Firearms Act of 1934,"

    or something to that effect, since it is a significant felony to own/use such a device if not done in accordance with the National Firearms Act of 1934. Any legally owned suppressor is already registered with the federal government and is strictly controlled. Oregon and Idaho, for example, allow the use of legally owned sound suppressors. The current law doesn't even make an exception for law enforcement!

    Currently, Washington State law allows the ownership of firearm sound suppressors, and the installation of suppressors on firearms, but not the actual use of the device. I am a hunter and shooting sports enthusiast, but I suffer from moderate to severe tinnitus (permanent ringing in the ears) from exposure to loud music as a youth.

    Even with hearing protection, such as ear muffs and ear plugs (I use both at the same time), I still cannot tolerate the muzzle blast from gunfire. In addition to protecting the hearing of those involved in shooting sports and hunting, use of sound suppressors diminishes the environmental effects of firearms noise. This is beneficial both in the woods and at firearm ranges that are inevitably within earshot of many homes.

    Lastly, it is easy to demonstrate that the use of legally owned firearm sound suppressors poses no threat to the public. Because suppressors are legal to own and possess, the law (misdemeanor) restricting their use will not inhibit poaching, as the crime of poaching is already more severe. The term "silencer" is a misnomer, since even with use of the suppressor, the firearm is still too loud to be used without hearing protection, but hearing protection does become adequate for hearing safety.

    Also note that in many European countries, such as Finland, sound suppressors are barely regulated at all, and are commonly used during hunting for the benefit of the environment and to protect the hunters' hearing.

    Thank you for your time. This is most definitely a health and environmental issue, and there are no drawbacks whatsoever to this proposed change in the law.

    Sincerely,

    Ben
    I think this is a better approach, showing that only a very minor change is required to the law. And also showing that the law makes no exception for law enforcement.

    You can go here to write to your own legislators:

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinde...p=98115&code=1

  2. #2
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    08-11-04
    Location
    Puget Sound
    Posts
    4,148
    Excellent letter, Ben.

    The card I'm playing is that my substantial hearing loss (recognized and compensated for by the VA) occured during the course of my 20-plus years in the militay.
    Will

    Everything I know about cops, their respect for the citizens of this country and its Constitution, as well as the state of policing in this country ... I learned from the Internet.

  3. #3
    Member  
    Join Date
    11-22-07
    Location
    Collegeville, Minnesota
    Posts
    76
    Very well said.

    Would you be offended if I were to plagiarize bits from your letter to send to my own congress folks here in Minnesota?

    Thanks,
    Colin
    Colin Doyle

  4. #4
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    02-25-04
    Location
    seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,291
    Plagiarize away, please!

  5. #5
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    03-01-04
    Posts
    3,524
    Just say 'in accordance with Federal law'

    Federal laws can and do change
    IANSA is the enemy.

    "If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all." ~~Henry Waxman

  6. #6
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    It's a new year, anyone else fee up to the challenge of persuing this again?

    I would love to get this one fixed...


    MD



    Legalize Suppressors in Washington State!
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=21965771250

  7. #7
    http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...at-makes-sense

    Apparently this is already in the works.

    1 AN ACT Relating to firearm noise suppressors; and amending RCW
    2 9.41.250.
    3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
    4 Sec. 1. RCW 9.41.250 and 2007 c 379 s 1 are each amended to read
    5 as follows:
    6 (1) Every person who:
    7 (a) Manufactures, sells, or disposes of or possesses any instrument
    8 or weapon of the kind usually known as slung shot, sand club, or metal
    9 knuckles, or spring blade knife, or any knife the blade of which is
    10 automatically released by a spring mechanism or other mechanical
    11 device, or any knife having a blade which opens, or falls, or is
    12 ejected into position by the force of gravity, or by an outward,
    13 downward, or centrifugal thrust or movement;
    14 (b) Furtively carries with intent to conceal any dagger, dirk,
    15 pistol, or other dangerous weapon; or
    16 (c) Uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any
    17 firearm unless the suppressor is legally registered and possessed in
    18 accordance with federal law
    ,

    19 is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW.
    ---
    Your Second Amendment Rights are showing!
    http://www.opencarry.org

  8. #8
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    Sorry, short notice, public hearing is tomorrow, executive session on Thursday

    WA Sate residents - Please help fix are backwards suppressor laws.

    man the fax machines, phones and send an email to your rep

    links

    http://www.the-minuteman.org/content...Barron-Barnett


    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...1016&year=2011

  9. #9

  10. #10
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    01-03-03
    Location
    Where I5 meets the rain forest
    Posts
    1,865
    In the 1980s a man with a wire walked into a guns store in WA and asked for some suppressor parts to be built per a book by Paladin Press.

    ATF agents flew out to the WA and spent millions of dollars on hotel bills and restaurants.
    Wire tap on the store owner's home produced a stack of transcripts over an inch thick. Most of the conversations were of the owner's wife talking to the owner's mother in law.

    The public defender lead the defense. And although he was not very good, the jury was only out for 5 minutes and came back with not guilty and some harsh words for the prosecution.

    What does it all mean?
    There is a big difference between felony to posses and felony to manufacture.
    The Bush bans manufacture, and is ignored. The 1934 act is possession and pursed like a witch hunt.
    The word 'forum" does not mean "not criticizing books."
    "Ad hominem fallacy" is not the same as point by point criticism of books.
    If you bought the book, and believe it all, it may FEEL like an ad hominem attack, but you might strive to accept other points of view.
    The Mercer Island school district buys history books with liberal spin on more paragraphs than not.
    Are we a nation of competing ideas, or a nation of forced conformity of thought?

  11. #11
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    There is an accompanying Senate Bill.

    The Senate companion bill is 5112.

    Please write to the Senate Judiciary committee members and ask them to give the bill a hearing.

  12. #12
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    2011 REGULAR SESSION
    Dec 13 Prefiled for introduction.
    Jan 10 First reading, referred to Judiciary. (View Original Bill)
    Jan 12 Public hearing in the House Committee on Judiciary at 8:00 AM. (Committee Materials)
    Jan 13 Executive action taken in the House Committee on Judiciary at 10:00 AM. (Committee Materials)
    JUDI - Executive action taken by committee.
    JUDI - Majority; do pass. (Majority Report)
    Jan 17 Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.

    Rep. Joe Schmick
    The bill did have a hearing and already was voted out of the House Judiciary Committee yesterday. It passed 12-0 out of committee.


    Contact rules committee !!!

  13. #13
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    Rules Committee


  14. #14
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    !!! Hey Hey Hey !!!
    1016-2011 passed the house 88-4, 6 exempt, just about 90% of the house is FOR fixing it.

    Every WA State Rep needs to be contacted ASAP

    This is now moving to the Senate, then if favorable, Queen G takes a stab at it.

    Feb 7 Committee recommendations adopted.
    Placed on third reading. Third reading, PASSED
    Yea = 88
    Nay = 4
    Absent = 0
    Excused = 6

    Yea:
    • Ahern
    • Alexander
    • Angel
    • Armstrong
    • Asay
    • Bailey
    • Billig
    • Blake
    • Buys
    • Carlyle
    • Chandler
    • Clibborn
    • Cody
    • Condotta
    • Crouse
    • Dahlquist
    • Dammeier
    • DeBolt
    • Dickerson
    • Dunshee
    • Fagan
    • Finn
    • Fitzgibbon
    • Frockt
    • Goodman
    • Green
    • Haigh
    • Haler
    • Hargrove
    • Harris
    • Hasegawa
    • Hinkle
    • Hope
    • Hunt
    • Hurst
    • Jacks
    • Jinkins
    • Johnson
    • Kagi
    • Kelley
    • Kenney
    • Kirby
    • Klippert
    • Kretz
    • Kristiansen
    • Ladenburg
    • Liias
    • Lytton
    • Maxwell
    • McCoy
    • McCune
    • Miloscia
    • Moeller
    • Morris
    • Moscoso
    • Nealey
    • Orcutt
    • Ormsby
    • Orwall
    • Overstreet
    • Parker
    • Pearson
    • Pedersen
    • Pettigrew
    • Probst
    • Reykdal
    • Rivers
    • Roberts
    • Rolfes
    • Ross
    • Ryu
    • Santos
    • Seaquist
    • Sells
    • Shea
    • Schmick
    • Short
    • Stanford
    • Sullivan
    • Takko
    • Taylor
    • Tharinger
    • VanDeWege
    • Walsh
    • Warnick
    • Wilcox
    • Zeiger
    • Mr.Speaker

    Nay:
    • Darneille
    • Hudgins
    • Hunter
    • Springer

    Excused:
    • Anderson
    • Appleton
    • Eddy
    • Rodne
    • Smith
    • Upthegrove

  15. #15
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    From THR

    Quote Originally Posted by RanB
    Bill 5112 was heard by the Senate Judiciary Executive Committee this morning. There was no debate. The decision was a unanimous "do pass" recommendation. It goes to the Rules Committee next.

  16. #16
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    The house already passed HB 1016,
    SB 5112 is the Senate Companion Bill.
    It was scheduled for a second reading today.
    A public hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee has been scheduled for March 9th, at 1:30 PM.

  17. #17
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    From RanB

    Heads Up
    Five people showed up to support, none opposed. Senator Kline acknowledged that bill 1016 is the same as bill 5112 and that there was no reason 1016 leave without a "do pass" recommendation.

    The video of today's hearing also included an executive session in which bill 1016 was referred out of committee with a "do pass" recommendation.

    http://www.tvw.org/media/mediaplayer...0085630&bhcp=1

  18. #18
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    Sounds like its all good... Queen G needs to sign, sounds like everyone thinks it is a LE bill so its good to go.

  19. #19
    Senior Member  
    Join Date
    10-13-05
    Location
    Canuck in SE WA State.
    Posts
    3,164
    Apr 6 Delivered to Governor.

    Apr 11 Governor signed.

    http://www.the-minuteman.org/content...Barron-Barnett

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •