Skip to main content
  1. News
  2. Politics
  3. Policy & Issues

Fallout continues in wake of 'assault weapon ban' hearing

   Gun rights activists are continuing to dissect and analyze remarks made by State Sen. Adam Kline, Bellevue Police Chief Linda Pillo and Ralph Fascitelli, president of Washington Ceasefire during Tuesday’s sometimes rambunctious hearing on SB 6396, which would ban so-called “military style semiautomatic assault weapons.”
   It would not actually ban the firearms – current owners would be grandfathered in, but future sales would be prohibited – but it would be the proverbial “reasonable first step” toward eliminating these guns. In Kline’s own words, “My purpose for bringing this bill is to remove from commerce, eventually, over the course of years, the most lethal weapons that we have legally to this day. We’ve already banned at the federal level machine guns. This is a reasonable extension from that ban; semiautomatics that meet certain physical characteristics.”
   A more detailed report will appear in the next issue of Gun Week, but for the moment, let’s discuss some of the more questionable aspects of the hearing.
 

 
   According to Joe Waldron, legislative director for the Bellevue-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, “The individual sign-in sheets (showed) 313 people signed in to testify. Fourteen indicated they supported the bill and 298 checked the ‘con’ column, and one person left both blank.”
   Yet Sen. Kline, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee and is prime sponsor of the legislation, equally divided testimony between pro and con. Some gun rights proponents contend this gave unfair advantage and “weight” to those supporting a ban.
   Others were amused and/or offended by Kline’s contention that certain physical characteristics of a so-called “assault weapon” make it “more lethal than your ordinary deer rifle.”
   Without trying to confuse non-gun owners, the AR-15, which is the primary target of this proposed ban, fires a cartridge – the .223 Remington – which was designed for shooting prairie dogs and small predators such as foxes and coyotes. The “ordinary deer rifle” to which Kline alluded in the hearing typically fires a .30-caliber cartridge such as the .308 Winchester or .30-06 Springfield, which have ample knockdown power to bring down a bull elk.
   Fascitelli “proudly represents” Ceasefire, which he described as “a statewide citizen activist group of 5,000 members dedicated to one thing: Reducing gun violence in Washington State.”
 

My purpose for bringing this bill is to remove from commerce, eventually, over the course of years, the most lethal weapons that we have legally to this day.'-Sen. Adam Kline

 
   On the other hand, Brian Judy, the National Rifle Association’s lobbyist for Washington State, said his organization has some 92,000 members here. NRA has spent generations, and millions of dollars, working to reduce firearms accidents through training and education, and has also supported such landmark measures as “Three Strikes” and “Hard Time for Armed Crime” laws. Judy called Kline's proposal "unconstitutional and arbitrary."
   Fascitelli argued that “In the last decade, more Washingtonians were killed by firearms than all of the U.S. combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.”
   Well, that may be a bit misleading. The statement gives the impression that there have been a lot of homicides here, but in reality, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, the years between 2000 and 2009 (Pay attention to "Table 5" data as you go from year to year) produced a total of 1,693 murders in Washington, and not all of them were with firearms. Different figures are available from the Washington State Department of Health that cover the years from 2000 to 2008, and they show 1,187 total firearm homicides.
   The latest total casualty figures I could find for Iraq and Afghanistan is 5,346 American dead. This comes from icasualties.org and it is probably not up to date.
   Now, Fascitelli is correct, if (and only if) you toss in the 4,099 firearm suicides and 82 accidental deaths logged by the DOH. But it is interesting how anti-gunners invariably throw in data about suicides and accidents when they talk about "gun violence," as if to suggest that intentional suicide is the same as a criminal homicide.
 
 
 
   We discussed Chief Pillo’s testimony yesterday, but readers should review the video of the hearing and pay particular attention to the exchange between Pillo and Sen. Pam Roach, the pro-gun Auburn Republican who challenged Pillo to explain why one gun has more “lethality” than another firearm that may be virtually the identical in its mechanics, but only cosmetically different. Pillo’s answer may or may not satisfy people, depending upon their philosophical persuasion on this issue: “Because of the multiple rounds that can be fired...in seconds.”
   She also carefully noted – as if to confuse people with short memories – that “Since October, six officers are dead and two are injured from…gunfire.”
   Five of those officers were murdered by perpetrators using handguns. As NRA’s Judy noted, four Lakewood cops killed at a Parkland coffee shop by Maurice Clemmons died from a total of eight rounds, two less than would be the limit in Kline’s bill to define an “assault weapon.” Six of those shots came from a .38 Special revolver.
   (Chief Pillo is coming under fire from activists who object to her appearance in full uniform, while claiming to speak only for herself, essentially as a private citizen. In addition to CCRKBA's Alan Gottlieb, a Bellevue resident, at least one Open Carry activist has sent a protest letter to Bellevue City Manager Steve Sarkozy.)
   Coverage of the event was interesting, but not for its details or lack thereof. What was interesting was who chose to cover the hearing, and who did not. Seattle’s KOMO was there (veteran reporter Bryan Johnson did his usual good job), and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer’s on-line edition had coverage, as did the Daily Olympian. Coverage was noticeably absent in the Seattle Times, however.
   Pundits are calling Kline’s legislation “dead on arrival” and predict it will never get out of committee.
   Perhaps the most useful result of having such legislation introduced is finding out who supports and who opposes the measure, and what lengths they will go to in order to obfuscate the issue by playing with statistics and carefully couching their rhetoric.
 
More from Gun Rights Examiners 

Atlanta: Ed Stone |  Austin: Howard Nemerov |  Boston: Ron Bokleman |  Charlotte: Paul Valone |  Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn |  Cleveland: Daniel White |  DC: Mike Stollenwerk |  Denver: Dan Bidstrup |  Grand Rapids: Skip Coryel |  Los Angeles: John Longenecker |  Minneapolis: John Pierce |  National: David Codrea |  Phoenix: Douglas Little | Seattle: Dave Workman |  St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann |  Wisconsin: Gene German
 
And Don’t forget to visit:
 
 
 
 
 

Comments

  • Aran 4 years ago

    I guess that one person was just there to watch.

  • Mike Cheney 4 years ago

    We just need to keep the pressure on these people now.
    It is Criminal violence not gun violence. If they had done their job right in the first place those cop killers would of not been out. Yet as usual they seek to disarm legal citizens and take away our rights in exchange for neglecting to do what they were elected to do in the first place. They hide behind their fear and ignorance taking the path of least responsibility.

  • Stand and Be Counted 4 years ago

    Mike- Good comment. Corruption of the court system and political parties needs to be addressed by the sleeping public. Share this site with others.

  • TWG2A 4 years ago

    Gun owners are clearly losing rights with each new gun law. We're constantly trying to correct statistics, and those against our second amendment rights don't even want to be
    educated because they are convinced regardless of all that information that the real problem is that the (evil) firearms owners have hate and violence in their hearts.

    We have seen Constitutional protections for fundamental individual rights eroded by government that is actively hostile to the legacy of individual sovereignty we inherited from the American Revolution, and abandoned by countrymen who have surrendered to fear, laziness, apathy and complacency.

    We're entangled in laws that portray natural rights as vices and attack them in the name of false security, and by government that grows like a cancer until it occupies every area of
    human life.

    We find our speech threatened, our communications spied upon, our privacy violated, our finances probed, our bedrooms monitored, our bodies controll

  • Robert 4 years ago

    Did anyone ask the anti-gun people to break down their stats and explain where they came from? Politics is about making the numbers lie. Ask them when they are going to ban cars since cars kill more people than guns every year. Or are they going to ban just cars that make people want to go fast and endanger others? I would assume then that all sports cars, hot rods, overpowered cars, and specialty cars are going to be banned from Washignton state just like "Assault" weapons because they entice "bad" behavior. Isn't it nice to have the government control all aspects of your life and prevent you from protecting yourself. We live with this crap in California every day so if you want to find out what it is like to have the government control most of your life come visit us for a while and try to obey all the laws we have.

  • Carl from Chicago 4 years ago

    David, you are a knowledgeable and logic-driven advocate ... I would have loved to see you speak, and so would have Senator Roach.

    I get the feeling that Kline didn't want you there ...

    This thing is Dead in the Water.

  • Kirk Parker 4 years ago

    It's worth pointing out, in relation to the "extra lethal" claim, that the .223 cartridge is in fact so low powered that *it's not even legal for deer hunting here in WA.

  • JD 4 years ago

    "Without trying to confuse non-gun owners, the AR-15, which is the primary target of this proposed ban, fires a cartridge – the .223 Remington –"

    Dave, The AR platform comes in many more calibers than .223. I own more than one AR and my "ordinary deer rifle" is an AR chambered in .308.

  • JUDICIARY COMMITTEE? 4 years ago

    CHAIRMAN KLIEN?

    Confused? Vote Impeach

    SHELTON — The Mason County prosecutor's office sought a warrant to arrest Shawn Matthew Roe for violating his parole, but a District Court pro tem judge refused to issue it.

    Meanwhile, Roe's community corrections officer also requested a warrant for Roe's arrest from Mason County Superior Court.

    It had not been issued before Roe is believed to have killed Forest Service Officer Kristine Fairbanks and Sequim-area retiree Richard Ziegler on Saturday.

    Nevertheless, Mason prosecutor Gary Burleson said Monday that no red flags alerted his staff that Roe was a public danger.

    "That did not occur in this case," Burleson told the Peninsula Daily News.

    "The violations were very standard violations."

    Moreover, he said, the state Department of Corrections did not issue an order of detention in Roe's case, nor did it issue its own warrant.

    As for the District Court warrant, it was denied by pro tem Judge Stephen Greer of Gig Harbor.

  • JUDICIARY COMMITTEE? 4 years ago

    Article III Section 3, could only confuse Klien too, that's why he's on the Judiciary Committee for the Confused

    Section 3.
    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

    The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

  • satriani77 4 years ago

    IF THE TRUTH BE EXPRESSED,ID NOT GIVE THE D-M ANTI-GUN NUTS ONE RIGHT,LIBERTY ISNT THEYERS TO TAKE, I GIVE NO ONE, THE RIGHT TO ENSLAVE, DISARM, KILL FOR FREE,MY LOYALTY IS TO THE CONSTITUTION,THE COUNTRY,NOT TO NO ONE THAT STEP ON THE ARMED FORCES RIGHTS FIGHTING FOR OUR FREEDOM .OR ENDANGER ALL BY ,PASSIN COMMIST ANTI-GUN LAWS , IV A M-14 THAT SHOOTS A 223, SO WHAT, ITS A GOOD HUNTING RIFE, IV A 1022 RUGER TO ,AND MORE, BUT IT DONT MADE ME A NUT CASE, A NUT CASE IS ONE THAT THINKS THEYER SAFE IN A GUN FREE ZONE,,,,,,,,,,,

  • CIDGofOne pt 2. 4 years ago

    Even a photo-op Cop on the borderline of unethical behavior engaging in a ‘political issue’ while in uniform ( perhaps even on duty in a ’protect-and-serve’ capacity ) and salaried by the taxpayer isn’t new.
    Expressing of one’s personal opinion is, of course, a protected ‘Right’, but on this issue supporting a bill arguably in violation of Washington State’s Constitutional provision that "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired,” calls into question allegiance to the most significant of all laws, those intended as prohibitions on government powers.

    For general info…
    ‘Colt’s AR-15 'Sporter' rifle has only been on the civilian market since 1964. Not that it's an issue, but maybe Colt possibly had a 'sporting purpose' in mind?
    'Machine guns’ aren't 'banned'.
    Legal Civilian ownership requires unconstitutional registration & taxes. Subsequently, many are also rendered expensive beyond fair-market value.

  • CIDGofOne pt 1. 4 years ago

    Those familiar with the now-defunct 10-year, so-called Federal ‘AW’ ‘ban’ recognize little that’s new on the part of those attempting to establish ‘reasons’ for this proposed State ‘ban’ on sport / utility firearms--semi-automatic firearms provably falsely dubbed as ’assault weapons',( distinctions primarily based on certain ’features’.)
    While self-governing, firearm-owning Citizens hold themselves to the highest standards of Morality, Conscience and Ethics--for civilian members of the ban-this, then that, this step, then that step, almost-always-unarmed-and-incapable-of-their-own-defense-crowd...ignorance, partial truths, half-truths, obfuscations, skewed statistics and outright lies are by now so typical, the knowledgeable look for new twists to rehashed falsities.
    ( At least in this proposed State 'ban', we're spared from having to endure outrageous claims of the RKBA pertaining only to a well regulated militia in the purely communist-inspired term... 'collective'.)

  • fact is 4 years ago

    March, 1999: Senator Feinstein introduces bill S.594, the Large Capacity Ammunition Magazine Import Ban Act of 1999.

    May, 2000: Senate bill S. 2515, Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2000, is submitted by Senators Feinstein, Senator Barbara Boxer, Sen. Lautenberg and Sen. Schumer. It is a plan for a national firearms licensing system.

    January, 2001: Senate bill S.25, Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2001, is sponsored by Feinstein, Schumer, and Boxer. It is a nation-wide gun registration plan [apparently there were two versions of that Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act bill].

  • fact is 4 years ago

    May, 2003: Senators Feinstein, Schumer, Boxer and others introduce legislation that would reauthorize the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, and, close a loophole in the law that allows large-capacity ammunition magazines to be imported into the U.S. The ban is scheduled to expire in September, 2004.

  • fact is 4 years ago

    March, 2005: Senator Lautenberg introduces bill S.645, “to reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act,” in other words, to reinstate the 1994 assault-rifle ban [also known as the "Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994"] which expired in late 2004.

  • fact is 4 years ago

    March, 2005: Senator Feinstein introduces bill S.620, “to reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act,” in other words, to reinstate the 1994 assault-rifle ban [also known as the "Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994"] which expired in late 2004.

  • Anon 4 years ago

    "We’ve already banned at the federal level machine guns." - Sen. Kline

    Either he has no idea what he's talking about or he was outright lying. Machineguns are NOT banned on the federal level whatsoever; nor are they banned in many states, although they have been illegal for sale in WA since July of 1994. Does he not know that NFA Title 2 (Class 3) weapons are legal to own? Even in WA, they are grandfathered as long as you owned it (ATF documentation required as proof) prior to the cutoff date

    Oddly enough, although you can both own and fire a machinegun in WA state (see above), which I do regularly, you can't attach a suppressor ("silencer") to a weapon and fire it.

  • Anon 4 years ago

    I'm going to see to it that Sen. Kline is well informed of all pertinent laws and regulations, encompassing both federal and state law for all fifty states with regard to machine gun ownership.

    He may be a liar but he won't be ignorant for long, although he may still end up claiming to be.

  • Anon 4 years ago

    “My purpose for bringing this bill is to remove from commerce, eventually, over the course of years, the most lethal weapons that we have legally to this day." - Sen. Kline

    Sir, "the most lethal weapons that we have legally to this day" are HUMAN BEINGS. Do not forget that. However, I also assure you there are weapons far more lethal than what you term "assault weapons" or "assault rifles", etc. For example, a bolt action, single shot rifle legally and easily available in a number of calibers are far more lethal (however you define lethality) and at a much greater range than the firearms you propose removing from commerce.

  • Anon 4 years ago

    Anyone as ignorant as Sen. Kline appears to be should not be eligible for an elected office whereby they are able to bring firearms legislation to committee, or anywhere else for that matter.

  • Flavet 4 years ago

    The depths of anti-Semitism plumbed in this set of comments is astonishing. I'm not Jewish myself, but a rednecked Southern Baptist, but I do believe I'm capable of supporting a valid point of view without attempting to call on prejudices that might or might not be equal to mine. Of course, I did object when the Jewish Adolf Hitler decided that gon control to the point of confiscation was essential to the survival of the regime.

    You jerks! How can the Examiner allow this sort of stuff in? They know darned well that they're not constrained by the First Amendment.

  • The Anti Semitist's 4 years ago

    Everyone knows the Left Coast. Adam Klien Chairman!

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." --Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as

  • Astonishing! 4 years ago

    From the "Jews for the Preservaton of Firearms Ownership" website
    To destroy "gun control" before more law abiding Americans are murdered by criminals or madmen helped by "gun control", you need to get hold of the evidence as presented in "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny. You can then challenge the media, the most aggressive backers of "gun control". Ask media personalities in your city or town why they back Nazi based laws. You can help to erase "gun control", Hitler's last legacy.

    GCA '68 puts your life at risk right now. You have a constitutional civil right to be armed in order to protect yourself, because under U.S law the police have no duty to protect the average person:

    "There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state (or Federal) against being murdered by criminals or madmen. It is monstrous if the state fails to protect its residents against such predators but it does not violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, or, we suppose, an

  • truth is... 4 years ago

    "You jerks! How can the Examiner allow this sort of stuff in? They know darned well that they're not constrained by the First Amendment."

    But it fits in so well with the politics of the actual owner of examiner.com.

  • straightarrow 4 years ago

    Where did you note anti-Jewish sentiment in these comments?

  • Jesse - Cochise County Libertarian Examiner 4 years ago

    Keep up the good work, Dave- I am doing my best in this neck of the woods...thank you!

  • twg2a 4 years ago

    Dave, I still can't tweet your articles. Please fix this! I want to share your interesting articles! Thanks

  • Dave Workman, Seattle Gun Rights Examiner 4 years ago

    'Straightarrow'
    I removed the anti-Jewish comments. I've been pretty laid back about remarks; freedom of speech thing, you know.
    But I physically go in and remove over-the-line stuff when I catch it...

  • Tim Hartzell 4 years ago

    Give them an inch they will take a mile. We have to stop bills like this in there tracks as soon as we hear of them. They did this in Santa Clara County Calif. and it made people fellons over night, it was a real dirty trick. Oh yes our tax payer dollars at work. I have no idea how much more has changed in Calif I moved away from their 11 years ago. But look at Calif. it's a mess. Let's not try and follow in there foot steps we have our own problmes.

  • Hunteroftruth 4 years ago

    This is so simple my friends. Build a jail in the neighborhood with the liberals then any one who commits a true crime with one of our military style high cap weapons just double the sentence. Then the stupid libs can go in and try to rehabilitate them talk nad make nice. You ask any convicted criminal what they fear most it is an armed citizen. The same damm thing progressive politicians fear.

  • Liberty Bell 4 years ago

    Isn't that why Vermont has the lowest crime rate of any State,
    a state where "keep and bear" requires no paperwork whatsoever!

  • Justice Douglas 4 years ago

    When a legislature undertakes to proscribe the exercise of a citizen's constitutional rights it acts lawlessly and the citizen can take mattersinto his own hands and proceed on the basis that such a law is no law at all.
    William O. Douglas

  • straightarrow 4 years ago

    Ok, Dave, but those people are our enemies also. Shouldn't we know who they are? Eventually they will need to be defeated also.

    I am deeply repelled by such ignorant bigots, but I do like to know where they are, just in case they need adjustment.

  • Woodswalker 4 years ago

    Hunteroftruth Writes: "You ask any convicted criminal what they fear most it is an armed citizen. The same damm thing progressive politicians fear."
    Seems to me that they may be one and same...just different crimes.

  • Picker 4 years ago

    Ask any policeman on the beat if he thinks citizens should be disarmed. The ones I've asked pretty much have the same answer,and that is: There would never be enough Policemen to handle the home invasion crime spree. It will be easy pickins for the criminals when the honest are defenseless. Another point I havent heard anyone address is how many officers are alive today because of armed citizens that happened to be at the right place at the right time.

  • W W Woodward 4 years ago

    When Chief Pillo shows up in front of a camera in full uniform she is definitely not speaking just for herself. She is speaking with weight of her entire department behind her, and possibly the weight of her city's governing body as well. Under color of law she has allowed her ignorance and ego to dictate her actions and claims authority she doesn't possess. A uniform tends to accentuate arrogance.

    Just my opinion, but then again, I'm not wearing a uniform.

    [W-III]

Advertisement