Two competing gun initiatives are attracting money from interests out of state, with both sides saying the other initiative is shooting blanks.
State initiative 591 (I-591) is touted as protection for gun and firearms rights.
State initiative 594 (I-594) is described by its supporters as expanded background checks for gun sales and transfers.
Both initiatives add sections to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 9.41.
Both initiatives are in conflict with each other.
If both are approved by voters, it is uncertain what will happen, however, it is likely the state Supreme Court will decide how to proceed.
I-591
I-591 aims to restrict the confiscation of firearms and to limit the requirement of background checks unless federally mandated.
(The initiative can be read in full at http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_471.pdf.)
I-591 is supported by the following organizations: Protect Our Gun Rights (campaign sponsor), Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Gun Owners Action League of Washington, Washington State Rifle and Pistol Association, Washington Arms Collectors, Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor Association, Hunters Heritage Council, Ferry County Tea Party and Walla Walla Tea Party Patriots.
Funds related to supporting I-591 have been reported to the Public Disclosure Commission by:
• Protect Our Gun Rights — $1,230,030.86 (all figures are current as of Oct. 20).
Donations were made by Washington Arms Collectors (more than $750,000), Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms ($305,000), and Gun Owners Action League ($120,000).
• National Rifle Association of America Washingtonians Opposed to I-594 — $486,631.49.
More than $485,000 was donated by parent organization National Rifle Association of Fairfax, Va.
• Washington Citizens Against Regulatory Excess — $112,933.62.
Donations of more than $6,500 were made by Daniel Solie of Olympia.
I-594
I-594 will put background checks on gun purchases, whether through a dealer or privately, including gun show and online sales, and prevent the transfer of firearms between individuals unless specifically stated as an exception.
(The initiative can be read in full at http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf.)
Some exceptions to I-594 include transfers as a gift between immediate family members (defined as spouses, domestic partners, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts and uncles), antique firearms, or temporary transfer to prevent “imminent death or great bodily harm” to the recipient.
Additional exceptions apply to circumstances at gun ranges and while hunting.
I-594 is supported by: Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (campaign sponsor), Washington Cease Fire, United Methodist Church, Faith Action Network, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Washington State Holocaust Education Resource Center, and Washington State Catholic Conference.
Funds related to supporting I-594 have been reported to the Public Disclosure Commission by:
• Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund for I-594 — $650,305.07.
More than $430,000 was donated by parent organization Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund of New York.
• Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility — $9,436,620.54.
Donations were made by Everytown for Gun Safety ($1.95 million), venture capitalist Nicolas Hanauer (more than $1.33 million), and Bill and Melinda Gates (more than $1 million).
The debate
While said to be drafted to close a background check loophole, some opponents to I-594 worry the initiative has much broader implications
“If it was just a background check law, I wouldn’t be as upset with it as I am now — I don’t have a problem with background checks,” said Chuck Laier of Aberdeen.
“They’re just trying to hinder somebody with a legally owned firearm any way they can. The law will make it as impossible as they can for the law abiding to have a weapon.”
Laier says laws requiring background checks already exist, they simply need to be enforced.
Additionally, Laier worries that law-abiding citizens will unwittingly violate the law if the initiative passes.
“No matter what you and I do as gun owners, it will make a criminal out of you,” Laier said.
As for limiting illegal possession of firearms, Laier doesn’t believe I-594 will be effective.
“Law abiding means law abiding, illegal means illegal … it wouldn’t make a bit of difference to a criminal,” he said.
While local officials are shying away from commenting on either initiative, legislators from the 19th District banded together in a letter to the editor encouraging voters to vote no on I-594.
“I-594 is not designed to reduce gun violence, but was drafted to take advantage of recent tragedies where (in all but one case) the perpetrators passed one or more of the background checks offered as a solution to gun-related violence in I-594. In our opinion, more of what is already not working is not a solution,” the legislators wrote. “The vote this November is yours and we ask that you carefully read the 18 pages of I-594 and vote no.”
The letter was signed by State Sen. Brian Hatfield of Raymond, and State Reps Dean Takko of Longview and Brian Blake of Aberdeen, all Democrats.
Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility representative Geoff Potter says I-594 will work and that worries of law-abiding citizens becoming criminals by default is misleading.
“In states that have closed the background check loophole, dramatically fewer women and police officers are killed with handguns,” Potter said in an email interview. “Our background check system has helped block more than 40,000 gun sales to prohibited purchasers since 1998, which shows how background checks can help keep guns out of dangerous hands. There’s absolutely no evidence of any of the scenarios raised by 594 opponents coming true in any of the other states that have laws like 594.”
Potter says groups stepping out in support of I-594 have also stepped out to oppose I-591, including the League of Women Voters and the Washington State PTA.
“Every major newspaper in Washington State has also opposed Initiative 591, including the Olympian,” Potter said. “They have done so because 591 was sponsored to block Initiative 594, preventing Washington from closing the background check loophole. It will also roll back Washington’s existing gun laws, making it harder for law enforcement officers to keep guns out of dangerous hands.”
Opponents to I-594 have continually pointed to transfers between law-abiding citizens as a way I-594 will make criminals out of otherwise upstanding individuals.
“Opponents are using the issue of ‘transfers’ to confuse voters,” Potter said. “The simple fact is that 594 will help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and other prohibited individuals, while also respecting the Second Amendment rights of Washington gun owners.”
Joyce Smith of Aberdeen is in favor of I-594.
“It seems so obvious to me to not have guns available to people with mental health problems or a history of domestic violence,” Smith said.
Gun violence remains an ongoing concern throughout the country, Smith says, and concerns that I-594 would somehow impede a citizen’s Second Amendment rights are far fetched.
“I think they’ve gone beyond reason with that,” Smith said. “In my estimation, the Second Amendment wasn’t meant for arming every citizen.”
And some citizens, not fit to benefit from the Second Amendment would be kept from access through expanded background checks.
“It would tell people if the person had a record of mental health issues or a history of domestic violence,” she said.
Registered voters will receive their ballots by Oct. 21. The general election will take place Nov. 4.
No comments:
Post a Comment