‘Criminalizing firearm ownership rights (through bureaucracy) part 1 ; SB 5078’
it's legally criminalizing the infringement of the 2nd amendment...while destroying FFL ownership and businesses in this state.
SB 5078 is known as the Firearm Industry Responsibility and Gun Violence Victims' Access to Justice' Act.
It should be called the 'Driving FFL business owners of out Washington state, and creating a potential black market for firearm ownership due to power-hungry, tyrannical bureaucracies who care more about virtue signaling and agendas, instead of enforcing laws, complying with the 2nd amendment, and prosecuting actual gun crimes' act. (but that doesn't roll too smoothly off the tongue, and is too brutally honest, isn't it?).
SB 5078 is a very dangerous law, and likely one of three ways to disarm, and ultimately make it illegal, for anyone to obtain, sell, or own firearms without permission of the State of Washington government (specifically, the Attorney General's office).
Any member who manufactures, sells, or 3d-prints a firearm (that also includes assembling 80% uppers), would be deemed 'a member of the firearms industry', and subject to being targeted by the attorney general's office for fines, and lawsuits. Anyone not in compliance with 'specified rules' in this law would receive a notice, and a chance to 'fix' any violations, before being sued. There's no minimum requirements as to what would 'trigger' a lawsuit, other than...reasons.
This would not only be a flagrant violation of the 2nd Amendment, but the 4th, as well as the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution (Article 6, Section II). This also interferes with interstate commerce.
The reason why this would be a violation of the Supremacy Clause, is because of the 'Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; (PLCAA) of 2005. This law protects the firearms manufacturers from tort lawsuits that stem from death or injury, due to the use of a firearm (which includes criminal and unlawful misuse); as firearms are protected under the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution. (this is a law that most gun-control organizations want to repeal, which also includes the current regime in D.C.).
The PLCAA isn't foolproof, though. (look at Sandy Hook v Remington Arms, 2011 as an example).
Even so, federal law trumps state law.
The core of this bill is based on an outdated nuisance law from 1875.
Nuisance, is defined under RCW 7.48.120:
Nuisance consists in unlawfully doing an act, or omitting to perform a duty, which act or omission either annoys, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health or safety of others, offends decency, or unlawfully interferes with, obstructs or tends to obstruct, or render dangerous for passage, any lake or navigable river, bay, stream, canal or basin, or any public park, square, street or highway; or in any way renders other persons insecure in life, or in the use of property
Using, and applying a seemingly outdated 'nuisance' law as a way to allow lawsuits against 'firearms industry members', is a gross misapplication of the law, as it was originally intended and written. In fact, this kind of abusive application can be viewed as an 'end-around', to criminalize the sale and manufacture of firearms in our state.
This, in, and of itself can be viewed as a gross infringement of the 2nd Amendment, since SB 5078 interferes with the ability to bear arms, which is a right we have.
The disturbing part of this bill is how it accuses the 'firearm industry members' of contributing to the illegal use of firearms...which constitutes a public nuisance.
It's not 'firearms industry members' that’s causing the problem of 'gun violence'.
It's criminals. Gun violence (excluding suicides) happen as a direct result of gun crimes, committed by CRIMINALS…
Nowhere in this bill, is the term 'gun crimes' mentioned....
Guns don't fire themselves. People know that guns are deadly.
It's a very foolish (if not outright dangerous) notion to believe that you can apply 'blanket', vague restrictions on law-abiding people who buy guns for sustenance, self-defense, competition and/or entertainment, while ignoring (and refusing to enforce) gun violations and crimes committed by criminals (unless you're in a position of power, intent on furthering an agenda that goes against the law you swore to an oath to uphold).
The rules are mostly based on 'effects on public health', another specious, deceptive, and deliberately vague term (in the same area as 'equity', and 'stakeholder'.
This bill fails to address (and differentiate) gun crimes, from 'gun violence' (which deceptively includes suicides).
There are parts of this bill that seem to focus on the 'illegal marketing of firearms' to people who are prohibited from owning a gun, like minors (under the age of 21, no thanks to I-1639) or people with criminal histories (and/or mental health issues).
The problem with this, is there are no citation of statistics (or examples), to support this argument.
One factor this bill hopes to address (but would ultimately fail) is the advent of DIY guns (also known as 3D-printed guns). It intends to impose arbitrary restrictions on these kinds of guns, even though this is a 1st amendment violation (free speech, and expression).
This bill imposes strict controls on what kind of firearms a 'firearms industry member' can sell. In most cases, the firearms that 'firearms industry members' sell must meet a list of guidelines (which can be difficult, if not impossible to comply with, given the amount of guns sold, and the different safety features mandated by this bill, that each firearm must have).
This gives the attorney general's office sole discretionary power in deciding on whether to bring punitive damages against any 'firearm industry member' who's violated arbitrary, specious rules that this law has set out to define. Such information, (regarding investigation of a 'firearms industry member'') wouldn't be disclosed to law enforcement, except via search warrant.
There's no requirement to prove 'damages' or 'nuisance' committed by a 'firearms industry member'. This allows anyone, for any random reason, to file a lawsuit against a 'firearms industry member'.
It's very clear that this bill is aimed at not only making it extremely difficult for a FFL (federal firearms license) holder to lawfully buy or sell firearms ever again, but it intends to make it next to impossible to obtain a firearm legally in our state, as well.
It's been mentioned that if this bill passes, a lot (if not most) of the small, independent buisness owners with FFLs, would close down permanently, or leave the state, due to the higher premiums (insurance rates) they would have to pay.
This would be the beginning of criminalizing of firearm ownership…and it would be law.
Due to legal and political maneuvering, this bill, if signed by Inslee, would go into effect immediately, as an 'emergency measure' (which is illegal, given there's no emergency).
This measure serves as an end-around, to avoid debate, lawsuits, and a time to enact this law (there's usually a grace period between the time a bill is signed into law, and when it goes into effect).
This bill would beg for injunctive relief, the moment it's signed into law.
March 29th is the deadline for this bill to pass in the state House. Let's see what happens.
Exactly!
Using any loophole they can against we the people