Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, July 08, 2019

Washington state has raised its minimum age for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle to 21, along with other new rules governing gun ownership. The age restriction went into effect in January, with the other changes taking effect July 1. But some in state law enforcement have vowed not to enforce the measure, arguing that it violates the Second Amendment. Under the new law, someone buying a semi-automatic rifle has to be at least 21 years old, pass a stricter background check, take a safety training course, and complete a 10-day waiting period. The law does not impose a retroactive ban on people under 21 owning such guns, but it does increase the restrictions on where they can possess them. Washingtonians under 21 can only have a gun in their homes, in a fixed place of business, or on real property under their control.

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

An officer of the court refusing to enforce the law.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Also worth reading. And in the very least it's vague. You could arrest half of America under this.

#1 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-07-08 01:51 PM | Reply

Washingtonians under 21 can only have a gun in their homes, in a fixed place of business, or on real property under their control.

Posted by HeliumRat

And that does not make sense to you?

If the Sheriff cannot enforce the law then he needs to step down.

"I understand there's an argument that a sheriff has to follow the rule of law, and I would say generally that's true, unless I feel as an elected sheriff, I have the authority and right to protect the rights of the citizens of Klickitat county that I serve."

So now he thinks he only has to enforce the laws the he personally agrees with and likes?

yeah, that boy needs to go.

Can you imagine if he had refused to arrest someone for smoking a joint? All hell would have broke out.

The Sheriff is there to serve and protect and to ENFORCE the law.

If you cannot enforce the law then you cannot be Sheriff! It is sorta the rule.

"I have the authority and right to protect the rights of the citizens of Klickitat county that I serve."

Storing a gun in an unsafe manner is not a right.

If you are 18 and want a gun then get trained, follow the rules or join the military. They will gladly give you a gun. But, you don't get any bullets unless you are under hostile fire. Sorry. Even the military does not trust 18 year olds with a loaded gun. And I do not blame them. I was 18 once.

#2 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-08 06:44 PM | Reply

If the Sheriff cannot enforce the law then he needs to step down.

#2 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2019-07-08 06:44 PM | FLAG:

LOL. Funny how when it comes to firearms, some people go all in against selective enforcement. Take that same person, change the subject to MJ, immigrants, etc, and selective enforcement is the way to go.

#3 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-07-09 08:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#3 MJ and immigrants don't kill 40000 Americans a year..like guns do

#4 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-07-09 08:32 AM | Reply

So now he thinks he only has to enforce the laws the he personally agrees with and likes?
yeah, that boy needs to go.

I wonder... why don't you feel the same about enforcing federal immigration law? When Obama directed the DOJ to ignore laws, you all referred to it as discretionary enforcement.

#5 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-07-09 09:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#5 you're comparing two very different things.

Can you see them?

#6 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-09 11:07 AM | Reply

#3 MJ and immigrants don't kill 40000 Americans a year..like guns do

#4 | POSTED BY 503JC69 AT 2019-07-09 08:32 AM | FLAG:

MJ has gotten millions of black men imprisoned and killed thanks to the war on drugs and gun control. Only through selective enforcement has violence decreased, and there is still a long way to go.

#7 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-07-09 11:11 AM | Reply

#5 They're not really that different..can't you see that? In both cases, the legislative branch passed a law, and the person in charge of enforcing that law is deprioritizing it to the point of ignoring it because he disagrees with it.

#8 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-07-09 11:28 AM | Reply

#7 making my point for me...
Mj laws destroy lifes.. not the plant itself.. and those laws should be ignored

Comparing black men going to prison to 40k killed every year with guns is a massive stretch

#9 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-07-09 11:36 AM | Reply

#8 except that's an enumerated power of the POTUS.

Can you point out where a local sheriff has that same authority?

And yes, I realize this goes on every day when an officer decides not to write a ticket, make an arrest ect.

The issue is coming out and stating authoritatively that he won't.

#10 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-09 03:23 PM | Reply

Gun sellers say they saw a spike in sales before the new law went into effect. Tiffany Teasdale, owner of Lynwood Gun, told the Seattle-based radio host Jason Rantz that her store sold over 400 guns in 3 days.

"People start doing what we call panic buying," Teasdale said. "They will normally buy 1–2 firearms a year and all of the sudden they are buying 15 in a month."

Sheriffs across the state have denounced the law, saying it is harmful to the people they are sworn to protect by making it harder for them to defend themselves. Some go further, declaring that they will not enforce it.

So, a rush of underage people buying guns. What could go wrong? It's not like they are statistically in more car accidents, workplace accidents, drug-related accidents, or gun violence.. right?[/snark]

Imo, this law should absolutely be retroactive and force anyone under 21 to relinquish their "ownership" of any guns to a qualifying adult.

The sheriff isn't administrating the law in the best interest of his department or the people he is allegedly serving and protecting. That is obvious. Why do they want more underage weapons use?

#11 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2019-07-09 04:10 PM | Reply

#8 except that's an enumerated power of the POTUS.

BS. The closest is "ensure that laws are faithfully executed". He cannot ignore laws any more than the sheriff of Podunk.

#12 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-07-10 07:39 AM | Reply

#8 except that's an enumerated power of the POTUS. - #10 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-09 03:23 PM
Selective enforcement is an enumerated power of the POTUS?
Citation or just pulling stuff out of your ass and hoping nobody calls you on it?

#13 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-07-10 11:30 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort