Washington state lawmakers have introduced or reintroduced a number of gun bills in Olympia hoping to strengthen gun laws in the state. Most have made it past the committees and are now on the Senate and House floors. The momentum for the bills comes after voters overwhelming passed Initiative 1639 back in November of 2018. Initiative 1639 changed the laws and regulations surrounding "semi-automatic assault rifles" and also requires more extensive background checks for firearm purchases along with requirements for safe gun storage.
Several of the gun bills were introduced at the request of Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson who has led the charge on strengthening the laws surrounding guns and what he believes is the "easy acquisition of firearms for those who shouldn't have one." Ferguson has long been a proponent for more strict firearm laws in Washington and the entire country.
Senate Bill 5062 & House Bill 1068
The bills both would limit magazine capacity of firearms in the state to ten rounds. Currently, most firearms such as handguns have magazine capacities up to 15-17 rounds with assault rifles in some cases able accepting magazines with a capacity of up 100 rounds.
Proponents for the bill believe that by limiting the capacity in magazines it will be harder for those "ill-intended" to do as much damage. They suggest that by limiting the rounds it will decrease the time a suspect is able to fire his weapon before needing to reload. Most noted that several mass shootings where high capacity magazines were used only ended when the shooter's firearm jammed or they ran out of ammunition. Others believe that the time to reload is a window to disable the shooter or allows victims precious times to escape.
Opponents of the bill suggest that the law would do little as anyone well trained is capable of changing a magazine within just a few seconds and could carry enough spare magazines to do just as much harm. One victim spoke at the capital when the bills were first introduced and expressed that had she been only allowed to have a firearm with ten rounds she wouldn't be a victim, instead she would be a statistic. Many opponents suggest the state and government should enforce the laws already established noting that several mass shootings involved a person who, by currents laws, shouldn't have had one prior.
Senate Bill 5027 and Senate Bill 5072
The bills pertain to extreme risk protection orders and aim to limit the access of those under an order from possessing, purchasing, or having access to a firearm. They would not be allowed to legally possess, purchase, or access a firearm for a period of five years after the order expires. The law would also pertain to minors and would require parents and/or guardians to safely store any firearms in the house.
Many victims of domestic violence and families that have lost loved ones to suicide have long sought for legislation to create a law allowing law enforcement to be more strict in questionable situations. The bill has had some, but not much opposition as most 2nd Amendment loyalist have long believed the real issue with gun violence has been mental health and those who shouldn't have a firearm accessing one.
The bills have many stipulations for an order to be placed and must allege that a respondent poses a significant risk to themselves or others by having control of purchasing, possessing, accessing, or receiving any firearm. The laws also allow for the individuals' personal information to be protected under certain circumstances.
More...
Other bills also proposed are SB 5174 which would require concealed pistol license holders to complete specific training to have a concealed pistol license. SB 5143, as written, would require law enforcement to seize firearms and ammunition at domestic violence incidents and require a waiting period to return the items.
NRA and GOA take matters to the courts
Both the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America have filed several lawsuits in the superior court challenging Initiative 1639 and what they deem is an "infringement of rights." The main challenging point has been the requirement for gun owners to sign a lifetime waiver of their health rights that can at anytime be used to deem them unfit for firearm ownership under numerous interpretations. Along with the age limit changing from 18 to purchase a "semi-automatic assault rifle" to 21.
So far, judges have upheld similar challenges by both groups in other courts and the court battle is expected to last a lengthy amount of time with appeals expected regardless of findings. Both proponents and opponents of the initiative have been publicly outspoken. They each have held marches and hundreds of gun owners marched on the capital in previous weeks promoting gun rights.
The term doesn't exist, yet
Some firearm retailers have chosen to disregard Initiative 1639 and the age limit that was enacted and went into law on January 1. They argue the law doesn't officially classify any firearm as a "semi-automatic assault rifle" until July 1 and therefore the age limit portion of the law that began on January 1 cannot exist yet because the term, under current law, doesn't exist. The state has yet said how they will deal with stores that currently violate this portion of the law before July.
Local municipalities will honor the law
Raymond Police Chief Chuck Spoor spoke with the Herald to explain how the new law will affect the department and firearm purchases. "Unfortunately, it's the law and we will follow it," he said. "I don't exactly agree with it, but it is the law now."
According to Chief Spoor and other law enforcement agencies, the new law will create a significant amount of extra work and paperwork for the departments. How will they cover the extra cost and manpower to process transfers? Most suggest that a fee may be imposed by the departments eventually to help recoup the time spent processing request. The new law allows gun stores to charge $25 per transaction for a firearm to help the state offset the cost of the new registry for firearms, but did nothing to help the extra work for law enforcement.
"I'm not sure how the whole thing will work out," Chief Spoor said. "But we [law enforcement agencies] eventually may have to tell gun stores that they need to charge an extra fee to cover the expense of our work. Who knows what will happen."