I-594 | 10-28-2014 | Chronline.com
The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (WAGR) talks a lot about how Initiative 594 will keep guns out of the hands of criminals. What they don’t report is that Initiative 594 is not aimed at criminals who, by definition, do not obey the law.
The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (WAGR) talks a lot about how Initiative 594 will keep guns out of the hands of criminals. What they don’t report is that Initiative 594 is not aimed at criminals who, by definition, do not obey the law.
I-594 would not be an effective crime deterrent and would only impose heavy burdens and legal hurdles for law-abiding citizens who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
 |
The reality is that criminals will still acquire firearms where they do now: the black market, straw purchasers, theft and illicit sources such as drug dealers. |
Law enforcement resources, however, will be diverted by I-594 to doing background checks on law-abiding, responsible gun owners who simply want to gift, loan, share and borrow firearms.
The "Gifting" Rules Intended to Confuse Voters
WAGR says that if I-594 is enacted, you would still be able to “gift” a firearm to an immediate family member without going through a background check. That is, in fact, one of the few honest claims they make about I-594.
|
However, what WAGR doesn’t tell you is that, in virtually all other cases,you would be committing a gross misdemeanor if you were to simply hand a firearm to an immediate family member or close, personal friend unless you broker the transfer through a dealer, complete the government paperwork, pay the fees, subject the transfer to Washington State Use Tax and, in the case of handguns, have the transferee added to the state registration database of law-abiding handgun owners. |
The Bureaucracy Burdens
WAGR is NOT honest about the extent to which law-abiding citizens will be impacted by their proposed 18-page monstrosity of bureaucracy, regulation taxation and state recordkeeping. They claim that I-594 regulates private firearm “sales” and contains “reasonable” exemptions.
|
In reality, I-594 regulates all firearm “transfers” and the exemptions are so narrow and limited that, in most cases, they will not apply. |
Let's take a look at their proposed language: Again, I-594 regulates private firearm transfers and defines “transfer” as “the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans.” A few minutes spent with Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary will clarify that “intended” means “intentional,” and “deliver” means “to hand over.”
|
So, if you intentionally hand over a firearm to another person, you have just committed a gross misdemeanor under the provisions of I-594(or a felony for a second occasion). |
What might constitute an “unintentional” transfer? Well, someone stealing your firearm would certainly be a transfer you did not intend. But that would not be covered by I-594 (see paragraph 1 above).
A Lesson in Hunting Under Initiative 594
So, yes, as WAGR boasts about their exemptions, a father could “gift” a shotgun to his son. But if Dad wanted to borrow the shotgun back from his son to use for a weekend hunting trip, that transfer would be subject to the I-594 bureaucracy. And, for Dad to return the shotgun to his son, it is back to the dealer to go through the whole process again!
|
While WAGR claims there is an exemption for hunting, it is unworkably narrow. |
If you are out hunting with your Dad or lifelong friend and his firearm malfunctions, you could loan them a spare as long as they only possess it where hunting is legal. But, as described before, you could not loan them a firearm to take on a trip without you.
Further, under the “while hunting” exemption, what happens when they cross a road from which hunting is illegal. They either have you carry the firearm across the road for them or you have just committed a gross misdemeanor.
The Wide-Ranging Criminalization of Firearm Transfers
There is an exemption for the temporary transfer of a firearm “at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located.”
|
While this exemption allows you to loan your firearm to a family member or friend to shoot at an authorized range, you would become a criminal if you make the same loan while target shooting on public land. |
When this was pointed out to WAGR Spokesperson Cheryl Stumbo during debate, her response was that you shouldn’t be shooting on public land anyway because it is not safe and that, family shooting trips on public land are “one in a million…extreme hypothetical examples. If you want to go on public land to shoot guns, go hunting.” (Click Here to Watch the Full Debate)That should give you an idea where the proponents of I-594 are headed!
Age is Everything
One final example of the deeply flawed provisions of Initiative 594: There is another exemption for the temporary transfer of a firearm to a person who is under 18 years of age while under the direct supervision of a responsible adult. So, if you are out shooting on public land with your 17-year old daughter, you can hand over your firearm for her to shoot.
|
But next week in the same location, after celebrating her 18th birthday, you can no longer allow her to handle your firearm without brokering the transfer through a licensed firearms dealer. |
But WAGR is apparently okay with that because they believe you shouldn't be shooting on public land anyway.
I-594 is a “simple measure to ensure that a background check is conducted for every gun purchase.”
No 18-page law is simple! Further, 594 is classic bait and switch…supporters constantly and dishonestly refer to “sales” when the language of the proposal regulates “transfers”, very broadly defined! Virtually every time a firearm changes hands, the transfer would be required to be processed through a licensed dealer. Worst of all, I-594 is being disguised as a simple background check measure, when in fact it would result in handgun registration!
I-594 proponents specifically claim that the initiative “does not create a registry.”
Virtually every temporary transfer of a handgun under the provisions of I-594 is subject to dealer regulation and completion of the Pistol Transfer Application, a copy of which RCW 9.41.110(9) requires be sent to the Department of Licensing for inclusion in the state database of law-abiding handgun owners.
I-594 includes “reasonable exceptions.”
The exceptions included in I-594 are drafted so narrowly that they are essentially meaningless. Examples:
Concealed Pistol License holders, who are subjected to fingerprint-based checks, are not exempt!
“Criminals go to gun shows to buy guns with no background check.”
In each of several studies by the U.S. Department of Justice over the last 23 years, between 0.6 and 0.8 percent of state prison inmates incarcerated for gun crimes obtained guns at gun shows. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns Used in Crime, July 1995; Firearms Use by Offenders, November 2001; and Firearm Violence, 1993-2011, May 2013.)
I-594 proponents cite a Justice Department study claiming that 80% of prison inmates obtained guns through private transfers.
The Justice Department study in question found that 77 percent of state prison inmates incarcerated for gun crimes had acquired their guns through “street/illegal sources,” including “theft or burglary,” “drug dealer/off street,” and “fence/black market,” or from “friends or family.” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, Firearm Violence, 1993-2011, May 2013.)
Criminals will ignore I-594 and continue to use these illegal sources.
“Private parties complying with the background check requirement are exempt from sales tax.”
Current law already exempts “casual and isolated sales of property” (such as private firearm sales) from sales tax…but subjects them to use tax. The sales tax exemption in I-594 is a disingenuous attempt to hide the facts that private transfers will be subject to use tax and that the records created by these dealer transfers will give the government the necessary tool to single out and collect more tax from law-abiding firearm owners.
“Law enforcement agencies and public safety officials agree that this (private firearm sale) loophole promotes illegal gun trafficking and enables individuals with criminal intent to purchase firearms.”
Numerous law enforcement officials, including the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs (WACOPS), have come out publicly opposed to I-594 and more are lending their voices every week. They understand that I-594 will divert their attention and resources away from keeping violent criminals off our streets and shift them to doing checks on law-abiding citizens, keeping us all less safe. Further, a police officer who loans a personal firearm to a fellow officer would face criminal prosecution under the provisions of I-594!
Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association (NRA) has released a one-minute digital video as part of it's online campaign to defeat Washington State Ballot Initiative 594. The video, titled I-594 Will Not Make Washington Safer, features Seattle resident Anette Wachter, "The 30 Cal Gal" blogger and U.S. Long Range Rifle Team member.
Fairfax, Va. – A majority of Washington State’s 39 sheriffs have come out in opposition to anti-gun Washington State Ballot Initiative 594. The sheriffs oppose I-594 because it will not make anyone safer, will strain scarce law enforcement resources, will criminalize the lawful behavior of millions of law-abiding gun owners in Washington and will be unenforceable. Instead, I-594 would vastly expand the state’s handgun registry and force law-abiding gun owners to pay fees and get the government’s permission to sell or even loan a firearm to a friend or family member.
To date, 27 of the 39 sheriffs have publicly opposed I-594.
Yesterday, the Washington State Republican Party issued a press release formally opposing Washington’s anti-gun Initiative 594.
Initiative 594 is a measure that will appear on Washington’s November ballot. A universal handgun registration scheme, I-594 would regulate transfers — not just sales — of all firearms in the Evergreen State. That means if a friend wants to try your gun at the range, you would have to broker the transfer through a gun dealer, with all accompanying fees, paperwork, use taxes and, in the case of handguns, state registration. I-594 also doubles the state waiting period on handgun sales from 5 to 10 days and extends it to every private transfer of a handgun. #VoteNo594
The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (WAGR) talks a lot about how Initiative 594 will keep guns out of the hands of criminals. What they don’t report is that Initiative 594 is not aimed at criminals who, by definition, do not obey the law.
The Washington Council of Police & Sheriffs, the state's oldest and largest law enforcement organization opposes Initiative 594. WACOPS represents more than 4500 active duty police and sheriffs deputies. Click here to read WACOPS position paper on Initiative 594.
Right now in the state of Washington, Bloomberg is pushing a November ballot measure that is promoted as being about background checks for private sales. But it is really a law to criminalize most gun owners, including those who never sell guns. If passed, the deceptive Bloomberg ban for Washington state is then going to become the national model, to gradually be imposed on gun owners nationwide.
By injecting large sums of money into advertisement campaigns designed to mislead voters on Initiative 594, misguided anti-gun elitists seek to purchase the constitutional freedoms of Washington residents out from under them.
As a result of an in-depth debate between the National Rifle Association and the Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (WAGR), the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs (WACOPS) has joined the Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association (WSLEFIA) in opposing the 18-page gun control measure, Initiative 594, on the Washington ballot this fall.
Tonight, a state anti-gun group called Washington Ceasefire will be holding a “gun reform” panel where the public is invited to engage panelists in a conversation about gun rights in Washington State. Currently, panelists consist of several anti-gun individuals, including President of the Brady Campaign, Dan Gross. This event will be held downstairs at Town Hall Seattle, 1119 Eighth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. Doors open at 6:30 p.m. and there is an entry fee of $5, which goes to Town Hall Seattle for production costs.
Last night, the Washington Legislature adjourned their 2014 session and while Initiative 594 stalled in the state Capitol, the fight is just beginning as the deeply flawed I-594 will now go to the November Ballot.
On Tuesday, January 28, Washington citizens will get their first opportunity to testify on Initiative-594, a major gun control bill being falsely promoted as a “Universal Background Check” measure. The House Judiciary Committee will take I-594 up at 1:30 p.m. in Hearing Room A in the John L. O’Brien House building on the Capitol campus in Olympia. The Senate Law & Justice Committee will take I-594 up the following day, Wednesday, January 29, at 1:30 p.m. in Hearing Room 1 in the John A. Cherberg Senate Building.
Give us your email address and we’ll keep you up to date about efforts to defeat I-594.
VOTE NO 594 is presented by NRA Institute for Legislative ActionPaid for by National Rifle Association of America Washingtonians Opposed to I 594, 11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030
Pursuant to WAC 390-18-025(1), the Top Five Contributors are: National Rifle Association of America