Washington state seeks to ban sale of 'assault weapons,' high capacity magazines

By Dan Whitcomb

 

FILE PHOTO: AR-15 rifles are displayed for sale at the Guntoberfest gun show in Oaks, Pennsylvania, U.S., October 6, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

 

 

 

(Reuters) - The state of Washington on Thursday proposed bans on the sale of "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines, part of a package of gun laws meant to address a rising wave of U.S. mass shootings.

 

If successful, Washington would become the seventh U.S. state to ban assault weapons, which it defines as semi-automatic rifles with at least one military feature, and the ninth to limit the capacity of ammunition magazines.

 

"We should be making it harder for those who want to inflict mass violence and destruction upon innocent people," Governor Jay Inslee said in announcing the gun-control push. "By limiting magazine capacity and banning assault weapons, we can work toward a day where no one in Washington state loses a friend or family members to senseless gun violence," Inslee said.

 

A study led by a researcher at Columbia University's Teachers College in New York found that gun attacks using large-capacity magazines typically had a higher death toll.

 

But it also discovered that even in states where high-capacity magazines are banned, more than half of shooters used them, apparently buying them elsewhere or obtaining them illegally. Large-capacity magazines are defined as those that hold more than 10 bullets. In 1994, Congress enacted a federal assault weapons ban, limiting these types of magazines, but it expired a decade later.

 

Today, nine states and the District of Columbia restrict possession of large-capacity magazines, but statutes vary in terms of maximum bullets allowed and applicable firearms.

 

Representatives for the National Rifle Association, which typically opposes efforts by U.S. states to enact stricter gun control laws, could not be reached for comment on Thursday.

 

Gun control is expected to be a major issue in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Most of the candidates for the Democratic nomination have said they would support renewing the federal ban on assault weapons and some have called for buyback programs.

 

Fully automatic weapons, sometimes called machine guns, are illegal under U.S. law unless they were manufactured before 1986. Perhaps because they are difficult to obtain, they have rarely, if ever, been used in shooting rampages.

 

A 64-year-old man who opened fire on a country music festival from a hotel overlooking the Las Vegas strip in October 2017, killing 58 people, used so-called bump stocks with his semi-automatic rifles, allowing him to fire rounds at a rapid rate similar to a machine gun.

 

The Trump administration issued a rule banning the sale or possession of bump stocks in December 2018.

 

(Reporting by Dan Whitcomb in Culver City, California; Editing by Bill Tarrant and Daniel Wallis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-12-13

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

Good!

Something is really wrong in a country, where a state or a provins have to seek a ban to stop selling of weapons of war to private citizens.

After that you gun lovers can talk about your highly rated constitution and the freedom to be an American. All that is just pure BS, to make up for a loss of self confidence.

Most of the people that buys these kind of weapons just need something that sends a signal to the brain that it´s an extension of their teenie weenies.

Bravo, Washington State.

Always wondered why they are always described as 'assault' weapons.

 

Why are they not called 'defence' weapons? This is the main reason/excuse that they are sold to the public in the first place.

Gun control laws as are any other laws on the books WILL NEVER PREVENT MASS SHOOTINGS, GUN VIOLENCE OR ANY OTHER CRIME FROM HAPPENING they are only instruments to hold a person accountable AFTER they have BROKEN THE LAW.  There is a reason police dont arrest and prosecute guns they arrest and prosecute people.

2 hours ago, Kleepanna said:

How I own several and I dont condone mass shootings

If you have many then you like them and are ok with that they are beeing sold easy over the counter.

That is a way to condone mass shootings.

*Deleted post edited out*

https://time.com/4965022/deadliest-mass-shooting-us-history/

3 hours ago, Benmart said:

Become an American citizen if you are not already and vote to change things. Otherwise, your comments are meaningless. Your last sentence is juvenile and pointless.

+1

1 hour ago, Matzzon said:

https://time.com/4965022/deadliest-mass-shooting-us-history/

Exactly my point! The number of people killed in mass shootings in the United States doesn't even come close to the number of people killed in Europe, Africa, and Asia because they didn't have access to firearms to protect themselves. Thanks for proving my point for me! Oh, one other thing, the deadliest mass shootings in American history weren’t even mentioned in the data you referenced because the two deadliest mass shootings in American history were carried out by the United States government.

9 minutes ago, oslooskar said:

because the two deadliest mass shootings in American history were carried out by the United States government.

 

That´s probably why they not classify as mass shootings.

When I grew up, with guns, mass shootings were virtually unheard of and guns easily available. When I was 10 I could buy ammunition at the grocery store. It was on the same shelf as candles, matches, and other related hardware goods. Something else, not guns, has gone horribly wrong, or maybe a few things. If one is serious, that's a good place to start looking. Might wind up fixing  other things along the way.

 

13 hours ago, Tug said:

Good!

Really?

Can you please explain what exactly an assault rifle is?

2 hours ago, Matzzon said:

That´s probably why they not classify as mass shootings.

You're right! They're classified as massacres.

Off-topic, troll, bickering posts and replies removed.  

 

8 hours ago, Kleepanna said:

Gun control laws as are any other laws on the books WILL NEVER PREVENT MASS SHOOTINGS, GUN VIOLENCE OR ANY OTHER CRIME FROM HAPPENING they are only instruments to hold a person accountable AFTER they have BROKEN THE LAW.  There is a reason police dont arrest and prosecute guns they arrest and prosecute people.

Gun control laws have eliminated or reduced mass shootings in all the countries where the laws have been introduced.

7 States finally change, a lot more to go. Of course we all know that an AR15 or

similar gun is a great hunting rifle if you are after 30 or 40 wild animals at

the same time. The USA still has a long way to go in changing the brain set of

their Right to bear arms, or bare arms crowds.  It is so confusing this English language.

Geezer

11 hours ago, oslooskar said:

Exactly my point! The number of people killed in mass shootings in the United States doesn't even come close to the number of people killed in Europe, Africa, and Asia because they didn't have access to firearms to protect themselves. Thanks for proving my point for me! Oh, one other thing, the deadliest mass shootings in American history weren’t even mentioned in the data you referenced because the two deadliest mass shootings in American history were carried out by the United States government.

 

Europe, africa, asia are not countries.

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Europe, africa, asia are not countries.

Europe, Africa, and Asia are many countries, which greatly strengthens the argument you try to blithely negate.

 

12 hours ago, oslooskar said:

You're right! They're classified as massacres.

Ok, then they did not belong then, so they didn´t forget anything, right?

2 hours ago, Matzzon said:

Ok, then they did not belong then, so they didn´t forget anything, right?

Wrong! They, like you, don't seem to understand that all massacres, of four or more people, carried out by firearms are mass shootings. Hence, all mass shootings are massacres but not all massacres are mass shootings. 

5 hours ago, Sujo said:

Europe, africa, asia are not countries.

Where did I state or imply that they were?

12 hours ago, sunnyboy2018 said:

Gun control laws have eliminated or reduced mass shootings in all the countries where the laws have been introduced.

What countries might those be?

1 hour ago, oslooskar said:

Wrong! They, like you, don't seem to understand that all massacres, of four or more people, carried out by firearms are mass shootings. Hence, all mass shootings are massacres but not all massacres are mass shootings. 

Then the world must be very lucky that you seem to be "The One" that understands much better.

4 hours ago, Matzzon said:

Then the world must be very lucky that you seem to be "The One" that understands much better.

On the contrary, the world understands all too well that the Wounded Knee Massacre and the My Lai Massacre were the deadliest shootings in American history; you're the only one who is having trouble connecting the dots.

 

On 12/13/2019 at 9:25 AM, chrisinth said:

Always wondered why they are always described as 'assault' weapons.

 

Why are they not called 'defence' weapons? This is the main reason/excuse that they are sold to the public in the first place.

Because some leftist progressives incorrectly assumed that AR-15 is short for "Assault Rifle 15" and not "ArmaLite Rifle 15" simply because it would fit their political agenda...?

40 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Because some leftist progressives incorrectly assumed that AR-15 is short for "Assault Rifle 15" and not "ArmaLite Rifle 15" simply because it would fit their political agenda...?

You are of course, precisely correct, but the AR-15 isn't the only weapon classed as an assault weapon. 

“Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don't let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas?” 
― Joseph Stalin

 

If it's about saving lives, then why not put the freeway speed limit down to 40 MPH and ban motorcycle use?

1 hour ago, MaxYakov said:

“Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don't let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas?” 
― Joseph Stalin

 

If it's about saving lives, then why not put the freeway speed limit down to 40 MPH and ban motorcycle use?

It's one of those American things, like the anti-abortion movement.

They call themselves pro-life but coincidentally these same people usually support the death penalty.  And once the child is born they care nothing about the quality of its life.

 

Something to bear in mind is Washington state's neighbors.  Idaho is solid red and known for right-wing tinfoil hatters, successionist movements, etc.  You may recall this came up in the OJ trial, one of the cops was a white power type who belonged to a group of them up there.  DT won the state by 30 points in 2016.

Eastern Oregon definitely has elements that lean heavily in that direction, with some wiseacre types referring to that part of the state as "western Idaho."

I can see that a motivating factor for Washington state taking this step is to discourage that element from moving there.