Does Washington's 2023 assault-weapon law (SHB 1240) cover rim-fire rifles like a .22 caliber semi-auto, or only center-fire rifles?

Plain-English summary

Senator Shelly Short asked whether Washington's 2023 assault-weapon ban (Substitute House Bill 1240, codified at RCW 9.41.390) reaches rim-fire semi-automatic rifles. Rim-fire vs. center-fire is a description of where the cartridge primer sits, not a description of how dangerous the firearm is, but Washington's statute defines several categories of "assault weapon" and only some of those categories are explicitly limited to center-fire models.

AG Ferguson worked through the categories one by one:

• (i) The 62 named firearms list. Includes everything on the list "regardless of which company produced and manufactured the firearm." Some of those listed firearms come in rim-fire models (FAMAS F11, certain AR-15 variants). If a rim-fire model is on the list, it is an assault weapon.
• (ii) Semi-automatic rifles with overall length under 30 inches. Not limited to center-fire. A rim-fire under 30 inches is an assault weapon.
• (iii) Conversion kits and parts. Not limited to center-fire either. Catches rim-fire conversions.
• (iv) and (v) Specifically limited to "center fire" rifles. Rim-fire rifles are out of these two categories.

The reasoning leans on two interpretive moves. First, when the legislature uses a term in some places (here, "center fire") and not in others, the omission is presumed deliberate. Second, the existing definitions of "firearm," "rifle," and "semiautomatic" elsewhere in RCW 9.41 do not turn on rim-fire vs. center-fire, so reading "center fire" into subsections (i), (ii), and (iii) would add words the legislature chose not to include. The opinion also notes that the legislature uses "rim fire" elsewhere in RCW 9.41 (the antique-firearm definition), demonstrating that it knows how to specify when ammunition type matters.

The opinion explicitly declines to address constitutional challenges to SHB 1240, citing the long-standing AG-office practice of not opining on the constitutionality of statutes the office may need to defend.

What this means for you

If you own a rim-fire semi-auto rifle in Washington

Run two checks. First, is your rifle on the 62-name list in RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i)? If yes, it is an assault weapon under the statute regardless of caliber. Second, is the overall length under 30 inches? If yes, it is also covered. If neither, the rifle is most likely not an assault weapon (subsections (iv) and (v) only cover center-fire). The statute does not retroactively criminalize possession of a previously lawful firearm; it controls future manufacture, import, distribution, sale, and offer-for-sale. Existing owners can keep what they own, but a sale within Washington is generally barred outside the narrow exceptions, and a sale to an out-of-state buyer through a properly licensed dealer is the route covered by AGO 2024 No. 4.

If you operate a youth or competition rim-fire shooting program

Inventory matters. Most rim-fire competition rifles (notably traditional .22 LR rifles 30 inches or longer in overall length and not on the named list) remain outside the assault-weapon definition. Rifles that are short overall, or are listed by name, are inside the definition. Buying replacements should go through a dealer who knows the SHB 1240 framework and can confirm the model is legal to sell in Washington.

If you are a Washington firearms dealer

Build SKU-level flags for the 62-name list and the under-30-inches threshold. Both apply across rim-fire and center-fire. The "center fire" filter only narrows subsections (iv) and (v); it does not narrow the front three definitions. Maintain the documentation needed for the RCW 9.41.390(2)(c) out-of-state-resident exception (see AGO 2024 No. 4) for any assault-weapon sale you process.

If you advise the legislature on potential clarifying amendments

The current statute is workable but produces some unintuitive coverage. A youth competition .22 with a short stock could become an assault weapon by virtue of the 30-inch rule, while a longer .22 of similar real-world function does not. If the legislature wants different coverage, the cleanest fix is a targeted exclusion (rim-fire-only competition rifles, for example), since the existing center-fire qualifier is already in subsections (iv) and (v).

Common questions

What is the difference between rim-fire and center-fire?

Both refer to where the cartridge's primer sits. Rim-fire cartridges have the primer around the rim of the cartridge base; center-fire cartridges have the primer at the center. Rim-fire is common in lower-caliber rifles like .22 LR. Center-fire is common in larger calibers used for hunting and most military rifles.

Is every .22 a banned assault weapon now?

No. A standard .22 long-rifle target rifle longer than 30 inches and not on the named-firearms list is generally not an assault weapon under SHB 1240. Coverage depends on the specific model and its overall length, plus whether it is on the named list.

Why does subsection (iv) say "center fire" but subsection (i) does not?

The legislature drew different lines for the named-firearms category and the feature-based / fixed-magazine-capacity categories. The opinion treats that drafting choice as deliberate and applies the inclusion-in-one-place-and-omission-elsewhere canon to read subsections (i), (ii), and (iii) as not limited to center-fire.

What about pistols and shotguns?

The opinion expressly limits itself to rifles because Senator Short's question was about rifles. Pistols and shotguns are addressed elsewhere in the assault-weapon definition and are not analyzed here.

Does this opinion settle the constitutional question?

No. The opinion declines to address Second Amendment or other constitutional challenges to SHB 1240, citing the AG office's longstanding practice of not opining on constitutional validity of statutes the office may need to defend.

What if my rifle is on the list but my model is rim-fire?

Per the opinion, "any" of the listed firearms is covered "regardless of which company produced and manufactured the firearm." If your model is the FAMAS F11 or another listed firearm, the rim-fire version is covered.

Background and statutory framework

RCW 9.41 is Washington's general firearms chapter. SHB 1240, enacted in 2023, added a comprehensive ban on the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, and offer-for-sale of "any assault weapon" (RCW 9.41.390). The ban targets manufacturer-side and dealer-side conduct rather than possession by existing owners.

The "assault weapon" definition lives in RCW 9.41.010(2)(a) and operates as a five-part test:
- (i) named firearms (62 specifically listed by manufacturer and model)
- (ii) semi-automatic rifles under 30 inches in overall length
- (iii) conversion kits, parts, or combinations from which an assault weapon can be assembled
- (iv) center-fire semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines and one or more enumerated features
- (v) center-fire semi-automatic rifles with fixed magazines holding more than 10 rounds

The center-fire qualifier appears only in subsections (iv) and (v). The opinion's analysis turns on that drafting asymmetry.

Citations

The plain-meaning approach to statutory interpretation is anchored in Duke v. Boyd, Lake v. Woodcreek HOA, and State v. Evergreen Freedom Foundation. The principle that no clause is read as superfluous is from Spokane County v. Department of Fish & Wildlife and Ralph v. Department of Natural Resources. The bar against adding words to an unambiguous statute is from State v. Delgado. The mandatory use of statutory definitions is from United States v. Hoffman. Plain meaning of non-technical undefined terms by reference to dictionary definitions is from Columbia Riverkeeper v. Port of Vancouver. The drafting-asymmetry / inclusion-in-one-place-and-omission-elsewhere canon is from State v. LG Electronics, citing In re Hopkins. State v. Hammock provides the rim-fire definition.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.atg.wa.gov/ago-opinions/inclusion-rim-fire-semiautomatic-rifles-statutory-restrictions-assault-weapons

Original opinion text

Attorney General

FIREARMS — STATUTES — Inclusion Of Rim Fire Semiautomatic Rifles In The Statutory Restrictions On Assault Weapons

The restriction on the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, and offer of sale on "any assault weapon" in RCW 9.41.390 applies to rim fire semiautomatic firearms that meet the definition of "assault weapon" in RCW 9.41.010(2), including any of the firearms listed in subsection 2(a)(i) and semiautomatic rifles that have an overall length of less than 30 inches as specified in subsection 2(a)(ii).

October 2, 2023

The Honorable Shelly Short
Senator, District 7
PO Box 40407
Olympia, WA 98506-0407
Cite As:
AGO 2023 No. 4

Dear Senator Short:

By letter previously acknowledged, you have requested our opinion on the following question:

Does the prohibitory section of Substitute House Bill 1240 (SHB 1240), 68th Leg., Reg. Sess., ch. 162 (2023) apply to rim fire semiautomatic rifles?

BRIEF ANSWER

In some cases, yes. A "rim fire" firearm is one designed to use a particular type of cartridge, as further explained below. Some rim fire semiautomatic rifles fall under the definition of "assault weapons" as defined in SHB 1240. That section defines "assault weapon" to include any of the 62 specific firearms listed in subsection (2)(a)(i), some of which we understand come in rim fire models. That section also defines "assault weapon" to include semiautomatic rifles that have an overall length of less than 30 inches, which also can include rim fire models. Thus, if any of the specific firearms listed in subsection (2)(a)(i) is designed for rim fire ammunition, or if a rim fire rifle has an overall length of less than 30 inches, it is an assault weapon and subject to the restriction in SHB 1240, section 3 (codified as RCW 9.41.390). Other categories of assault weapons defined in the bill, namely in subsections (4) and (5), specifically cover only "center fire" models, so those categories would not include rim fire models.

BACKGROUND

In 2023, the legislature enacted SHB 1240, which amends RCW 9.41 to restrict the manufacture, import, distribution, sale, and offer of sale of "any assault weapon." RCW 9.41.390(1). Your request asks whether rim fire semiautomatic rifles are included in this restriction. SHB 1240 defines "assault weapon," and provides for certain exclusions from that definition. RCW 9.41.010(2). Before engaging in an analysis of the relevant statutes, we first provide factual context for your question.

Firearms, including rifles, are commonly designed for rim fire or center fire ammunition. A bullet with a rim fire cartridge is one for which "its primer, the explosive, is around the rim of the cartridge." State v. Hammock, 154 Wn. App. 630, 633, 226 P.3d 154 (2010). A rim fire rifle is designed to use rim fire cartridges. In contrast, the primer of a center fire cartridge is at the center of the base, and center fire rifles are designed specifically to use center fire cartridges.

Comments we received report that some firearm types are available in both rim fire and center fire designs. They also note that semiautomatic rim fire rifles are often used for target practice and competitions (youth and adult) as well as small game hunting.

ANALYSIS

The purpose of statutory interpretation is to determine and give effect to legislative intent, which should be derived primarily from the statutory language. Duke v. Boyd, 133 Wn.2d 80, 87, 942 P.2d 351 (1997). Thus, statutory interpretation begins with the statute's plain meaning. Lake v. Woodcreek Homeowners Ass'n, 169 Wn.2d 516, 526, 243 P.3d 1283 (2010). To ascertain a statute's plain meaning, we look to "the entire context of the statute in which the provision is found, [as well as] related provisions, amendments to the provision, and the statutory scheme as a whole" for guidance. State v. Evergreen Freedom Found., 192 Wn.2d 782, 789, 432 P.3d 805 (2019).

Statutes are interpreted and construed so that all the language used is given effect, with no portion rendered meaningless or superfluous. Spokane County v. Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 192 Wn.2d 453, 458, 430 P.3d 655 (2018). Thus, statutes are interpreted "as a whole so that, if possible, no clause, sentence, or word shall be superfluous, void, or insignificant." Ralph v. Dep't of Nat. Res., 182 Wn.2d 242, 248, 343 P.3d 342 (2014). Likewise, neither words nor clauses may be added to an unambiguous statute when the legislature chose not to include them. State v. Delgado, 148 Wn.2d 723, 727, 63 P.3d 792 (2003).

If a term is defined in statute, that statutory definition must be used. United States v. Hoffman, 154 Wn.2d 730, 741, 116 P.3d 999 (2005). Undefined terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning. Id. Meanings of non-technical statutory terms may be discerned from their dictionary definitions. Columbia Riverkeeper v. Port of Vancouver USA, 188 Wn.2d 421, 435, 395 P.3d 1031 (2017).

Consistent with the above authority, we first look to the statutory definition of "assault weapon" in RCW 9.41.010(2) to determine whether it expressly includes or excludes rim fire semiautomatic rifles. That definition is, in relevant part, as follows:

(i) Any of the following specific firearms [listed within this subsection] regardless of which company produced and manufactured the firearm[; or]

(ii) A semiautomatic rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches;

(iii) A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled or . . . converted . . . if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person; or

(iv) A semiautomatic, center fire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more [specifically listed features]; [or]

(v) A semiautomatic, center fire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds;

. . . .

RCW 9.41.010(2)(a).

SHB 1240 does not use the term "rimfire" or "rim fire." However, it does use the term "center fire" to define two types of assault weapon. See RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(iv), (v). Thus, those specific subsections apply only to center fire weapons, and would not include rim fire semiautomatic rifles. State v. LG Elecs., Inc., 186 Wn.2d 1, 9, 375 P.3d 636 (2016) ("[W]here a statute specifically designates the things upon which it operates, there is an inference that the Legislature intended all omissions.") (quoting In re Pers. Restraint Petition of Hopkins, 137 Wn.2d 897, 901, 976 P.2d 616 (1999)).

The remainder of the subsections in RCW 9.41.010(2)(a) that address rifles are not so limited. Accordingly, by process of elimination, subsections (i), (ii), and (iii) are most applicable to your question.

Turning first to RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i), an assault weapon includes "any" of the 62 specifically listed firearms. The common meaning of "any" is "one or more without specification or identification" or "whatever or whichever it may be." Use of the term "any," coupled with the absence of any qualifier based on type of ammunition used, means that a semiautomatic rim fire rifle qualifies as an assault weapon if it is one of the firearms listed in RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i). Comments we have received indicate that several firearms listed in that subsection are rim fire semiautomatic rifles, such as the FAMAS F11 and some versions of the AR15.

Turning next to RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(ii), an assault weapon also includes a "semiautomatic rifle" having an overall length of less than 30 inches. This definition is also not dependent on whether the rifle is center fire or rim fire.

Turning last to RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(iii), an assault weapon includes a "conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled," and thus applies whenever the underlying weapon is itself an assault weapon, regardless of whether it uses rim fire or center fire cartridges.

We also consider whether the terms "firearm," "semiautomatic," or "rifle" would themselves exclude rim fire rifles under existing law. They do not. RCW 9.41.010(20) defines "firearm" as "a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder [but] does not include a flare gun or other pyrotechnic visual distress signaling device, or a powder-actuated tool or other device designed solely to be used for construction purposes." RCW 9.41.010(40) defines "semiautomatic" as "any firearm which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge." Finally, RCW 9.41.010(37) defines "rifle" as "a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger." None of these definitions hinge on whether the rifle is center fire or rim fire. Thus, none of these terms exclude rim fire rifles.

To interpret RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i)-(ii) as excluding rim fire rifles would require reading a qualification into the plain language of the statute that the legislature chose not to include. It would also ignore that the legislature expressly limited subsections (iv) and (v) to center fire firearms, but did not so limit subsections (i), (ii), and (iii). Therefore, under the plain and unambiguous language of SHB 1240, a semiautomatic rim fire rifle is an assault weapon if it falls under RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i)-(ii).

Although your question is answered by the plain language of SHB 1240, we also note that the legislature has used the term "rim fire" elsewhere in RCW 9.41, and, by doing so, has demonstrated that it knows how to specify when a law applies to such devices differently. Specifically, the legislature defines "antique firearm" in relevant part as "a firearm or replica of a firearm not designed or redesigned for using rim fire or conventional center fire ignition with fixed ammunition and manufactured in or before 1898 . . . ." RCW 9.41.010(1) (emphasis added). This demonstrates that the legislature knows the difference between center fire and rim fire rifles but has elected not to treat such devices differently in subsections RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i)-(iii).

In summary, under the plain and unambiguous language of SHB 1240, a semiautomatic rim fire rifle is an assault weapon subject to the restrictions under RCW 9.41.390 if it is either (1) a specific firearm listed in RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(i), (2) has an overall length of less than 30 inches per RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(ii), or (3) is a "conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled" per RCW 9.41.010(2)(a)(iii).

Some comments we received raised or alluded to constitutional issues regarding SHB 1240, both generally and as it relates to rim fire rifles specifically. That issue is beyond the scope of the question presented, and by long practice, our office declines to provide opinions as to the constitutionality of enacted statutes because we often defend the validity of statutes when challenged in court.

We trust that the foregoing will be useful to you.

ROBERT W. FERGUSON
Attorney General

LAUREN R. KIRIGIN
Assistant Attorney General