Well, Not Really . . . and Definitely Not in Washington
Like the Ninth Circuit ruling a little over two weeks ago about non-violent felons being allowed to possess firearms (not quite), last weeks’ Supreme Court ruling concerning bump stocks triggered some phone calls to our offices.
And, like the Ninth Circuit ruling, the Bump Stock ruling has no immediate effect in Washington whatever.
This headline:
Supreme Court Rejects Trump-Era Ban on Gun Bump Stocks
while accurate, does not mean there’s a fundamental shift in Washington gun laws. We’ll explain a bit below . . .
But First – Please Don’t Call Us . . . about bump stocks
Washington State Laws Banning Bump Stocks Have Not Changed
This decision only affects the thirty-five states that never passed laws banning bump stocks. The fifteen states and District of Columbia that enacted bans on the sale, ownership, possession of bump stocks are not affected in any way.
Washington enacted legislation in late 2018 banning bump stocks, specifically:
RCW 9.41.190 Unlawful firearms (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, it is unlawful for any person to: (a) Manufacture, own, buy, sell, loan, furnish, transport, or have in possession or under control, any machine gun, bump-fire stock . . . (b) Manufacture, own, buy, sell, loan, furnish, transport, or have in possession or under control, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, bump-fire stock . . .
Any of the above is a Class C felony. The use of a bump stock in the commission of a crime is a Class A felony.
Again, the Supreme Court ruling has no effect on any of this
Here’s why:
Understanding the Garland v Cargill Decision
After the 2017 mass shooting at a music festival in Las Vegas killed 60 people and injured more than 500, the ATF issued a ban on bump stocks. They concluded that bump stocks made long guns int0 machine guns. Machine guns were outlawed in the US by the National Firearms Act of 1934.
In 2018, anyone who owned or possessed a bump stock was required to either destroy the material or turn it in to the agency to avoid criminal penalties.
Michael Cargill, a gun shop owner in Austin, Texas, surrendered two bump stocks to ATF and then challenged the rule in federal court.
The local federal court initially dismissed the case, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit agreed with Cargill that “a 1986 law’s definition of a machine gun does not apply to bump stocks because the rifles equipped with the attachments don’t shoot multiple bullets ‘automatically,’ or ‘by a single function of the trigger.’”
The Biden administration appealed the 5th Circuit’s decision to the Supreme Court. Last week’s decision upheld the Court of Appeals.
Why the Decision Doesn’t Change the Law
Garland v Cargill was not decided as a Second Amendment case. As a matter of fact, the Second Amendment isn’t mentioned once in Justice Thomas’ nineteen-page decision. This was a case that challenged the rule making authority of the ATF, indeed, the rule making authority of federal agencies in general.
The suit simply stated that the ATF overstepped its authority in banning bump stocks nationwide and, in doing so, infringed on an area over which only Congress has jurisdiction. While simultaneously arguing that a gun modified with a bump stock does not meet the definition of a machine gun and, therefore, is not subject to the 1934 ban or the various acts that came after it.
Thomas and the majority agreed that bump stocks do not create machine guns while adding Congress is certainly free to legislate them if it so chooses.
Only citizens in states with no existing bumper stock laws are potentially affected. In theory, bump stocks may now be bought and owned in them.
Not, however, in Washington – not now and for the foreseeable future.
Gun Rights Restoration in Washington
In the meantime, this is a good place to note that Washington State has existing gun rights restoration laws in the books. That Knauss Law can help with.
Call anytime with you gun restoration rights questions and concerns.
425-300-5566