Unfortunately, Initiative 594 did pass in Washington state and the anti gun people will be pushing for that here in Vermont. We, as law abiding gun owners and Vermonters, need to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Shame on you Washington state. You’ve just created havoc and compromised every honest gun owner in the entire state.
NRA-ILA I-594 Talking Points
National Rifle Association of America
Institute for Legislative Action
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 625
Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 446-2455. ■ firstname.lastname@example.org
State & Local Affairs Division
Brian Judy, Washington State Liaison
VOTE NO on INITIATIVE-594!
NOT “Universal Background Checks” because criminals would ignore!
REALLY “Universal Handgun Registration” because ALL law-abiding handgun owners would be registered!
Initiative 594 would NOT PREVENT CRIMINALS FROM OBTAINING FIREARMS. It would create a HUGE REGULATORY SCHEME that would disproportionately burden law-abiding firearm sellers and purchasers. It would cause an EXPENSIVE DIVERSION OF SCARCE LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES. It would be UNENFORCEABLE. Further, it would create a MASSIVE GOVERNMENT DATABASE of law-abiding handgun owners.
-WOULDN’T STOP CRIMINALS
… Most criminals get guns through theft, on the black market, or from family and friends (80%!)
…Straw purchasers already pass background checks and provide firearms to criminals, and would continue to do so
…Only law-abiding gun owners would comply
-HUGE REGULATORY SCHEME
…Transferor and transferee to “licensed dealer”
…Would require dealers to take private sellers firearms into inventory
…Paperwork and background check (triplicate form to local law enforcement and state government on handgun transfers)
…If the buyer did not pass the background check, the dealer would be required to perform a second background check on the seller to return the firearm
-BURDEN ON LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS
…98% of the people who are subjected to background checks are approved immediately
…Would require virtually all transfers of firearms to be brokered through a licensed dealer (including most family transfers!)
-I want to sell a firearm to my brother…go through a dealer.
-I want to loan a firearm to my son…go through a dealer.
-I am out shooting with my 21 year old son…can’t let him handle my firearm without going through a dealer. (…but I can let my 16 year old son handle my firearm without dealer intervention – if supervised)
-My 17 year old daughter is on the high school trapshooting team…she can no longer use my shotgun.
-I am a rancher in Eastern WA and my 17 year old son takes my truck across the family property with my ranch rifle in the gun rack…I have just committed a gross misdemeanor.
…CPL holders NOT exempt
…Law enforcement officers not exempt when off-duty
…Would prohibit hunting by youth under age 18 without direct supervision and control
…Would double the waiting period on handgun sales from 5 days to 10 days and extend it to all private transfers
…Would extend the federal waiting period from 3 days to 10 days when checks are not approved immediately
…Would apparently impose a 30-day waiting period on all private transfers of secondhand firearms
-EXPENSIVE DIVERSION OF SCARCE LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES
…Law enforcement already spread thin doing checks on retail sales of handguns and CPL applications
…Some departments are not in compliance with existing law (CPL issuance requirements) due to resource limitations
…Only way to enforce this concept: Set up widespread sting operations which would disproportionately impact law-abiding citizens and would be prohibitively expensive, furthering the DIVERSION of SCARCE LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES .
-MASSIVE GOVERNMENT DATABASE OF LAW-ABIDING HANDGUN OWNERS
…Data on law-abiding handgun owners maintained by Washington State government (Department of Licensing)
…DoL already looking for tax dollars to keep up with existing database limited to retail sales
-ENFORCE EXISTING LAWS!
…It is a federal felony and a gross misdemeanor under Washington law for a person to submit false information on a background check form to purchase a firearm. If gun control supporters wanted to reduce crime, they would demand that law enforcement go after criminals* who try to illegally purchase a firearm.
* Of the 2% of people who are denied the purchase of a firearm by virtue of a background check, there is no indication that any more than a miniscule, negligible number of these criminals are ever prosecuted.
If the proponents are not clamoring for the full enforcement of existing law, why should anyone believe they will be clamoring for the full enforcement of this additionally burdensome proposal?
…Which leads to ONE conclusion: Initiative-594 is nothing more than a foot-in-the-door to comprehensive,
“UNIVERSAL FIREARM REGISTRATION”.
…The records created by these dealer transfers will give the government the necessary tool to single out and collect more tax (“Use” Tax) from law-abiding firearm owners!
…Additionally, the transfer fee payable to firearm dealers (essentially an additional “firearm transfer tax”) by law-abiding firearm owners is UNFAIR.
…If this regulatory/taxation/registration scheme were truly beneficial to society (which is very questionable), then society – as a whole – should shoulder the cost.