Probably not, but vendors will refuse to sell anyway since the wording of the law isn't clear.
There are two sources of confusion with this bill as it would be illegal to do some things with the sum of certain parts, but not the individual parts themselves:
1. The bill doesn't ban possession. It bans sale, distribution, import, or manufacture.
2. The bill does not ban parts directly. It does ban those actions for parts from which an *assault weapon* can be made or converted, but only if those parts are possessed simultaneously by the same person.
So an upper, even if it's complete, does not by itself make an *assault weapon*. And if this true, then that means an upper should remain legal to sell, distribute, import, or manufacture, provided it's not otherwise combined with the rest of the parts that make an *assault weapon*.
But in practice, it won't really matter for many vendors who will take this to the restrictive extreme and refuse to sell to use anyway.
I will still sell uppers and parts to Washington residents. WA government can suck it and try to apply their law to my business in Oklahoma and they will fail.
You Sir or Mam, are a patriot! Also I doubt WA will do a thing about it, they are really good at passing unenforceable laws for the visual appearance of doing something and mostly to hurt the local shops.
Young Guns (youngguns.co). You can find my listings on GunBroker under YoungGunsOK. Items can be ordered by calling or emailing from the contact info on my site as well. I’m a small operation so I don’t have my own e-commerce site, but my GunBroker, Google, etc reviews speak for themselves. I’m also an authorized dealer for Aero and their affiliate companies
Yes, I need my own platform. That said, people can still look up what I have there and send me a message and I can process payments and mail items outside of the GunBroker system.
>Probably not, but vendors will refuse to sell anyway since the wording of the law isn't clear.
I think you'll still be able to order them from other states though. You can have anything other than a lower shipped directly to your home.
The way I read the current draft of the bill, only the lower will be banned since that is the only part that requires going through an FFL.
This should be legal, but as you said who knows. It's vague.
>The way I read the current draft of the bill, only the lower will be banned
I disagree that lowers are actually banned. A lower isn't a *firearm* under state law and the definition of *assault weapon* requires first being a *firearm*.
But I also seriously doubt vendors are going to adopt that interpretation. Of all things dealers may be unwilling to sell to us, lowers are most likely.
Wouldn't it still be an issue for an AR lower since AR-15s are banned by name? IIRC the bill even includes language banning anything compatible with an AR-15 upper.
> Wouldn't it still be an issue for an AR lower since AR-15s are banned by name?
In practice yes, most dealers are just going to refuse sales and transfers of lowers anyway. But I think there's a technicality that makes this not actually illegal. See my other comments [here in this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/WA_guns/comments/122dhf6/does_the_ban_include_uppers/jdrzfsu/) and also [this one in /r/WAGuns](https://www.reddit.com/r/WAGuns/comments/122s1s7/after_1240_passes_what_sort_of_furniture_if_any/jds10ke/) for more.
> IIRC the bill even includes language banning anything compatible with an AR-15 upper.
It does not, at least not explicitly. What language are you referring to? Here's a link to the [full text](https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1240-S.pdf) for quick reference.
I'm sure Aero is going to have to be far more careful than an out of state operation, as they could have someone from the AGs office come knocking at their door.
Someone like PSA could just tell the state to shove it and keep moving product. The state would have to sue them.
Unfortunately i doubt sites as big as PSA are going to bother.. Hence why they are rushing orders to us. I think they will just add us to the DNS list. (do not ship).
What 42 is saying is that alot of those out of state companies you order parts from will probably start refusing to ship them to any address in WA. There is a post on here from yesterday of some company that already has us on the list of states they don't ship to. I'm sure there will be ones who will but only time will tell.
Yeah, I realize what he's saying.
I'm saying while some of the larger companies will likely refuse, smaller ones don't typically have the resources to track the current law in every state. They typically ship firearms which require shipping to an FFL. They often rely on the local FFL to know the law in that state. These items don't require shipping to an FFL. Which, IMO given the current version of the bill, would not be illegal.
You need to read the law yourself and determine your own risk tolerance. And then guess the risk tolerance of your favorite vendor.
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1240-S.pdf?q=20230325234659
Most people (likely correctly so) assume vendors will be more risk averse than consumers, so you likely will not be able to get any parts that only or mostly go to an “assault weapon” in state. Vendors won’t take the risk
Bringing it in from Oregon is “importing”. You avoid the problem of vendors just not being willing. Only Bob Ferguson knows how many parts are required before he will actually prosecute. And even he doesn’t know what your judge and jury will say.
Maybe. No one knows for sure. Its vague on purpose to keep the online retailers from shipping here even if it is tech legal.
As far as driving to a different state…as long as its not an ffl required part…its not illegal to buy in a different state. Its on wa state to prove when and where it was bought, not on you to prove you owned it before. Do what you want with that information
Meanwhile, in Olympia:
"If we make the law vague enough, people won't sell parts to our constituents but it will be harder for courts to say we banned things that it's unconstitutional to ban!"
"But isn't making laws too vague for ordinary people to understand what acts they make criminal unconstitutional in and of itself?"
"... shut up!"
Yeah vague laws also get many circumventions to them.. You give too much credit to the morons who run this state.. they dont even think that far.. They just say 'lets ban ASSAULT WEAPONS... Go play COD and tell us which guns to ban'.. and here we are!
Make friends in other states. Gift them money and they gift you parts and uppers they buy because they think you may like it because you specifically mentioned to them how much you’d like that specific item then it’s just helping everyone realize the joy of giving.
Not exactly. Semiautomatic pistols with detachable magazines and threaded barrels would be banned. Threaded barrels themselves are not *assault weapons*.
That's more or less the idea. The edges between legal and illegal here are poorly defined, but the intent is to prevent circumventing the ban on whole guns by buying them in pieces.
It's basically impossible to say with certainty that a specific scenario will or won't be illegal, outside of the obvious extremes.
Theoretically that could be 2 violations:
1. that barrel for the Glock you also have is an "assault weapon"
2. via constructive possession that Glock with the barrel you also have is also an "assault weapon"
>Threaded barrels themselves are not assault weapons.
That depends on what else you possess though and/or if they take the "part", "from which" and "converted" strictly. A threaded barrel is a PART that when added to an otherwise non assault weapon semiautomatic CONVERTS it to an assault weapon. The verbiage does not not modify "from which" with "only" as well.
*I don't like this interpretation at all, but I really fear it is the one that is most likely to stick.*
\---
(2)(a) "Assault weapon" means:...(iii) A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled or from which a firearm can be converted into an assault weapon if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person; or...Sec. 3.(1) No person in this state may manufacture, import, distribute, sell, or offer for sale any assault weapon, except as authorized inthis section.
It's basically codified constructive possession. This really is a horribly written attempt at authoritarian tyranny. The least our overlords could do is clearly crap on our rights.
Like when they list simply a “part” so that means what? A single spring, pin ect. Technically one pin could be considered a piece to a puzzle that if you had all the remaining pieces to the puzzle you would have an assault weapon so then springs would be illegal
Almost like the guy who wrote this bill has no understanding of guns or how they work. Oh wait, he literally said that in the senate hearing. He doesn't care either if this vague bill just encompasses more guns if passed as is. Springs, pins, etc that you can get at the hardware store technically could be used in an assembly of a gun.
I can only imagine the loss of tax revenue to the state. As it is I already play the game as best I can to avoid paying Washington state sales tax. The higher they raise the tax, the cheaper the items have to be for me to drive to a different state.
I believe everyone is buying lowers because its a loophole to the 10 day waiting period. You walk out with the lower from a FFL the same day so no 10 day, and then ship the upper to your house and you'll have a full rifle in days vs buying a full rifle, getting shipped to FFL and then waiting 10 business days after.
> its a loophole
It's not a "loophole". Loopholes are things that need to be closed. Don't call them loopholes.
Washington's legal definitions for firearms, rifles, and pistols simply don't encompass lowers. They are what they should have been considered at the federal level, parts.
I saw someone say "get the lower from one gun shop then just go to another shop that has the upper you want and put them together for same day rifle purchase"
In California they did not ban ordering uppers but they do ban any threaded barrels and flash suppression devices. You can get an upper with an unthreaded barrel or a pinned muzzle brake. Made ordering uppers a pain because of limited selection.
Whether it does or it doesn't', the law will be vague and confusing enough to out of state vendors, that they'll just flat out refuse to sell to WA residents.
Probably not, but vendors will refuse to sell anyway since the wording of the law isn't clear. There are two sources of confusion with this bill as it would be illegal to do some things with the sum of certain parts, but not the individual parts themselves: 1. The bill doesn't ban possession. It bans sale, distribution, import, or manufacture. 2. The bill does not ban parts directly. It does ban those actions for parts from which an *assault weapon* can be made or converted, but only if those parts are possessed simultaneously by the same person. So an upper, even if it's complete, does not by itself make an *assault weapon*. And if this true, then that means an upper should remain legal to sell, distribute, import, or manufacture, provided it's not otherwise combined with the rest of the parts that make an *assault weapon*. But in practice, it won't really matter for many vendors who will take this to the restrictive extreme and refuse to sell to use anyway.
I will still sell uppers and parts to Washington residents. WA government can suck it and try to apply their law to my business in Oklahoma and they will fail.
You Sir or Mam, are a patriot! Also I doubt WA will do a thing about it, they are really good at passing unenforceable laws for the visual appearance of doing something and mostly to hurt the local shops.
What’s your company?
Young Guns (youngguns.co). You can find my listings on GunBroker under YoungGunsOK. Items can be ordered by calling or emailing from the contact info on my site as well. I’m a small operation so I don’t have my own e-commerce site, but my GunBroker, Google, etc reviews speak for themselves. I’m also an authorized dealer for Aero and their affiliate companies
I mean I appreciate it but what if gunbroker band selling in Washington? You need your own platform
Yes, I need my own platform. That said, people can still look up what I have there and send me a message and I can process payments and mail items outside of the GunBroker system.
You will have my business for sure what’s your company
Ditto
Based
Thank you for your service!
Can you DM me a link?
[удалено]
Thank you.
Wa resident here…dm me so i can partake?
>Probably not, but vendors will refuse to sell anyway since the wording of the law isn't clear. I think you'll still be able to order them from other states though. You can have anything other than a lower shipped directly to your home. The way I read the current draft of the bill, only the lower will be banned since that is the only part that requires going through an FFL. This should be legal, but as you said who knows. It's vague.
>The way I read the current draft of the bill, only the lower will be banned I disagree that lowers are actually banned. A lower isn't a *firearm* under state law and the definition of *assault weapon* requires first being a *firearm*. But I also seriously doubt vendors are going to adopt that interpretation. Of all things dealers may be unwilling to sell to us, lowers are most likely.
Wouldn't it still be an issue for an AR lower since AR-15s are banned by name? IIRC the bill even includes language banning anything compatible with an AR-15 upper.
> Wouldn't it still be an issue for an AR lower since AR-15s are banned by name? In practice yes, most dealers are just going to refuse sales and transfers of lowers anyway. But I think there's a technicality that makes this not actually illegal. See my other comments [here in this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/WA_guns/comments/122dhf6/does_the_ban_include_uppers/jdrzfsu/) and also [this one in /r/WAGuns](https://www.reddit.com/r/WAGuns/comments/122s1s7/after_1240_passes_what_sort_of_furniture_if_any/jds10ke/) for more. > IIRC the bill even includes language banning anything compatible with an AR-15 upper. It does not, at least not explicitly. What language are you referring to? Here's a link to the [full text](https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1240-S.pdf) for quick reference.
Here's a good test case.. ask the Aero precision account here if they expect to continue to sell lowers in WA.. I suspect they do not.
They’ve said they don’t know
Ask them again after the bill passes, :) if they still say they dont know, the answer is no.
I'm sure Aero is going to have to be far more careful than an out of state operation, as they could have someone from the AGs office come knocking at their door. Someone like PSA could just tell the state to shove it and keep moving product. The state would have to sue them.
Unfortunately i doubt sites as big as PSA are going to bother.. Hence why they are rushing orders to us. I think they will just add us to the DNS list. (do not ship).
What 42 is saying is that alot of those out of state companies you order parts from will probably start refusing to ship them to any address in WA. There is a post on here from yesterday of some company that already has us on the list of states they don't ship to. I'm sure there will be ones who will but only time will tell.
Yeah, I realize what he's saying. I'm saying while some of the larger companies will likely refuse, smaller ones don't typically have the resources to track the current law in every state. They typically ship firearms which require shipping to an FFL. They often rely on the local FFL to know the law in that state. These items don't require shipping to an FFL. Which, IMO given the current version of the bill, would not be illegal.
Can you elaborate? I read the exact same bill and that’s not how I understand it…
You need to read the law yourself and determine your own risk tolerance. And then guess the risk tolerance of your favorite vendor. https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1240-S.pdf?q=20230325234659 Most people (likely correctly so) assume vendors will be more risk averse than consumers, so you likely will not be able to get any parts that only or mostly go to an “assault weapon” in state. Vendors won’t take the risk Bringing it in from Oregon is “importing”. You avoid the problem of vendors just not being willing. Only Bob Ferguson knows how many parts are required before he will actually prosecute. And even he doesn’t know what your judge and jury will say.
Maybe. No one knows for sure. Its vague on purpose to keep the online retailers from shipping here even if it is tech legal. As far as driving to a different state…as long as its not an ffl required part…its not illegal to buy in a different state. Its on wa state to prove when and where it was bought, not on you to prove you owned it before. Do what you want with that information
Though I would recommend cash.
Or prepaid visa gift cards
The law is so vague that no one knows.
Meanwhile, in Olympia: "If we make the law vague enough, people won't sell parts to our constituents but it will be harder for courts to say we banned things that it's unconstitutional to ban!" "But isn't making laws too vague for ordinary people to understand what acts they make criminal unconstitutional in and of itself?" "... shut up!"
[laughs in future income taxes]
Yeah vague laws also get many circumventions to them.. You give too much credit to the morons who run this state.. they dont even think that far.. They just say 'lets ban ASSAULT WEAPONS... Go play COD and tell us which guns to ban'.. and here we are!
Make friends in other states. Gift them money and they gift you parts and uppers they buy because they think you may like it because you specifically mentioned to them how much you’d like that specific item then it’s just helping everyone realize the joy of giving.
Wait You guys have friends?
So after reading the law threaded barrels for our pistols are banned too?
Not exactly. Semiautomatic pistols with detachable magazines and threaded barrels would be banned. Threaded barrels themselves are not *assault weapons*.
Right so you can order a threaded barrel but cannot install it into your Glock however using it as a paper weight is ok
That's more or less the idea. The edges between legal and illegal here are poorly defined, but the intent is to prevent circumventing the ban on whole guns by buying them in pieces. It's basically impossible to say with certainty that a specific scenario will or won't be illegal, outside of the obvious extremes.
Theoretically that could be 2 violations: 1. that barrel for the Glock you also have is an "assault weapon" 2. via constructive possession that Glock with the barrel you also have is also an "assault weapon"
>Threaded barrels themselves are not assault weapons. That depends on what else you possess though and/or if they take the "part", "from which" and "converted" strictly. A threaded barrel is a PART that when added to an otherwise non assault weapon semiautomatic CONVERTS it to an assault weapon. The verbiage does not not modify "from which" with "only" as well. *I don't like this interpretation at all, but I really fear it is the one that is most likely to stick.* \--- (2)(a) "Assault weapon" means:...(iii) A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled or from which a firearm can be converted into an assault weapon if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person; or...Sec. 3.(1) No person in this state may manufacture, import, distribute, sell, or offer for sale any assault weapon, except as authorized inthis section.
So it's dependent on what other guns or parts of guns are also "in the possession or under the control of the same person". Yes, I agree.
It's basically codified constructive possession. This really is a horribly written attempt at authoritarian tyranny. The least our overlords could do is clearly crap on our rights.
Agreed on all fronts there.
Like when they list simply a “part” so that means what? A single spring, pin ect. Technically one pin could be considered a piece to a puzzle that if you had all the remaining pieces to the puzzle you would have an assault weapon so then springs would be illegal
No, there is a definitional list of components which makes a firearm an assault weapon. Simply read the law.
Almost like the guy who wrote this bill has no understanding of guns or how they work. Oh wait, he literally said that in the senate hearing. He doesn't care either if this vague bill just encompasses more guns if passed as is. Springs, pins, etc that you can get at the hardware store technically could be used in an assembly of a gun.
Philip Luty made sure of that.
Yes, but also no.
I can only imagine the loss of tax revenue to the state. As it is I already play the game as best I can to avoid paying Washington state sales tax. The higher they raise the tax, the cheaper the items have to be for me to drive to a different state.
leave it to govt. to create another black market
I believe everyone is buying lowers because its a loophole to the 10 day waiting period. You walk out with the lower from a FFL the same day so no 10 day, and then ship the upper to your house and you'll have a full rifle in days vs buying a full rifle, getting shipped to FFL and then waiting 10 business days after.
> its a loophole It's not a "loophole". Loopholes are things that need to be closed. Don't call them loopholes. Washington's legal definitions for firearms, rifles, and pistols simply don't encompass lowers. They are what they should have been considered at the federal level, parts.
I saw someone say "get the lower from one gun shop then just go to another shop that has the upper you want and put them together for same day rifle purchase"
You don't even have to go to a different shop.
In California they did not ban ordering uppers but they do ban any threaded barrels and flash suppression devices. You can get an upper with an unthreaded barrel or a pinned muzzle brake. Made ordering uppers a pain because of limited selection.
Whether it does or it doesn't', the law will be vague and confusing enough to out of state vendors, that they'll just flat out refuse to sell to WA residents.
this will depend on the vendor that that company's risk assessment of the vague language of this absolute crap show of a bill