Washington bans anyone under 21 from buying assault rifles

Associated Press ^ | January 1, 2019 | Martha Bellisle

[NFHale]

“...All that happens is that some doped-up 19-year old will go and buy a Walther PPK, and kill a dozen people with it....”

In which case they’d use it as an excuse to try a handgun ban.

I have a problem with ANY LAW the democrats and/or RINOs pass to try to impose their gun control agenda.

[broken_arrow1]

So actually, for Washington, the closest (and really only) thing in law that can be referred to as an 'assault rifle', is specifically NOT AUTOMATIC, actually.>/p>

Washington might just as well have defined an "assault rifle" as any gun that is scary looking!

[backwoods-engineer]

Well, there goes the high-school participation in F-Class (AR-15) rifle competitions. Since parents can't buy rifles or magazines for their children (another Washington law), and now the 18-year through 21-year olds cannot buy an AR, they no longer can participate.

If you live in that socialist hellhole, and you care about the Constitution, get out while you can.

[pepsionice]

All of these attempted laws lead back to a state law (in all fifty states) that define murder. Apparently, that law (without much confusion attached to it)....never seems to make any difference.

[NFHale]

".. Apparently, that law (without much confusion attached to it)....never seems to make any difference...."

No, it doesn't, and never will.

Because at the end of the day, the people who write and pass those laws don't care about murder.

They only care about POWER, and the fact that that firearm in YOUR hands gives YOU the power to say "Hell, No, GFyourself" to THEM.

And ultimately that is ALL it is about - incrementally disarming us and having coercive control over you, me and every other American Citizen.

They are Public SERVANTS and should be treated as such, and when they step beyond their place, they should be treated with contempt and removed from ANY position of authority.

[Pollster1]

Can they also ban those under 21 from the free exercise of their religion, or from freely speaking?

[Gritty]

The law did not describe what such a course would look like. 4 hours for $50? Or two days at $400??

Perhaps we need a law so people must take a course ($50? $400) to safely vote.

As it stands today, Washington voters badly need such a law.

[zeestephen]

Re: I believe that was a separate referendum - but it did pass.

Thanks for correcting that.

Memories fade fast at my age!

[Svartalfiar]

Ha yea, that’s pretty much how the old Federal ‘assault weapons’ ban defined them!

[zipper]

So actually, for Washington, the closest (and really only) thing in law that can be referred to as an 'assault rifle', is specifically NOT AUTOMATIC,

The liberals that wrote the law deliberately distorted the definitions to blur the public’s perceptions of the lethality of commonly owned rifles.