‘Criminalizing firearm ownership rights (through bureaucracy), part 2: [E2S]HB 1143
it's legally criminalizing the infringement of the 2nd amendment...by turning 'the right to keep and bear arms..' into a privilege controlled by the Department of Licensing
This is part 2 of a three part series, 'Criminalizing firearm ownership rights'. part 1 was
SB 5078)
(Engrossed, Second Substitute) - ES2) HB 1143 – turning 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms' into a privilege to be maintained by the Department of Licensing.
This is very similar to Oregon's Proposition 114, which also mandates 'licensing' before purchasing a firearm. This is a rotten, vile bill that should not be allowed to stand. Given how this bill came directly from 'Governor' Inslee himself, this should give you every indication of how rotten this bill really is.
Make no mistake, dear patriots. Having an understanding of gun safety, and putting it into practice anytime you use, or own a gun, is paramount to being a responsible gun owner (especially firearms). With specific rights, come specific responsibilities.
However; this bill isn't interested in anything other than making it much more difficult to purchase and own a firearm. It also makes it much more difficult for a firearms dealer to sell guns to purchasers, while doing nothing about criminals who commit gun crimes.
It creates an even bigger bureaucratic monster, in the form of the Department of Licensing (or DoL, a thoroughly untrustworthy agency, that's ALSO involved in unvetted voter registrations). [ES2]HB 1143, while demanding that all firearms owners (and the firearms dealers) be 'licensed', which essentially creates a de facto firearms owner database.
Not only would purchasers be required to obtain a 'license', but so would FFL dealers, as well. (the employees who worked for those same FFL dealers would be forced to go through the same background checks as if they were actually buying a firearm)
The requirements for being granted a 'license', is to go through an approved firearms safety course.
A person applying for the purchase or transfer of a firearm
must provide proof of completion of a recognized firearms safety
training program within the last five years that, at a minimum,
includes instruction on:(a) Basic firearms safety rules;
(b) Firearms and children, including secure gun storage and
talking to children about gun safety;
(c) Firearms and suicide prevention;
(d) Secure gun storage to prevent unauthorized access and use;
(e) Safe handling of firearms;
(f) State and federal firearms laws, including prohibited
firearms transfers and locations where firearms are prohibited;
(g) State laws pertaining to the use of deadly force for selfdefense; and
(h) Techniques for avoiding a criminal attack and how to manage a
violent confrontation, including conflict resolution.
(2) The training must be sponsored by a federal, state, county,
or municipal law enforcement agency, a college or university, a
nationally recognized organization that customarily offers firearms
training, or a firearms training school with instructors certified by
a nationally recognized organization that customarily offers firearms
training. The proof of training shall be in the form of a
certification that states under the penalty of perjury that the
training included the minimum requirements.
(3) The training may include stories provided by individuals with
lived experience in the topics listed in subsection (1)(a) through
(g) of this section or an understanding of the legal and social
impacts of discharging a firearm
People who have previously completed a firearms safety/proficiency course, and current members of the military, as well as law enforcement (local, state, federal), are exempt from these requirements.
This would have the unintended effect (or deliberately intended, depending on your view) of creating a lengthy waitlist of people who need to attend 'firearms safety' classes, in order to be granted a 'license'...a 'license' for something that is a natural born right. This goes for firearms purchasers, AND firearms FFL dealers...
The license, would be $125, for both pistols, and non-pistols. The money would go into a 'general fund'.
Doesn’t this sound like money laundering?
This bill also details the legal procedures that must be followed; for anyone who's 'mentally adjudicated' (mental incapacitation, involuntary commitment). It seems to follow federal guidelines, but imposes its own guidelines by the state, which includes: notifying the Washington State Patrol (the WSP), the Department of Licensing, as well as the federal NICS background system.
Anyone who was placed on a '72-hour hold' (mandatory 72-hour stay in a health care facility due to mental illness/diagnosis), would be subject to license revocation/suspension of their firearm license. Anyone who received mental health treatment at a facility (due to mental incapacity) would have their records entered into a database maintained by the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery, a division of the Health Care Authority (as mandated by the Involuntary Treatment Act).
They would have to petition the court to have their firearms possession rights restored (which requires proving that the person who was mentally adjudicated, is mentally fit, and no longer dealing with the circumstances that allowed them to be mentally incapacitated). Once the rights are restored, the WSP, the DoL, and NICS would be contacted, to update their records.
Of more interesting note, is Section 7, which all but gives stage agencies immunity from lawsuits, which includes such things as a failure to issue a license to someone who lawfully qualifies to receive one, preventing a sale or transfer of a firearm to someone who's legally qualified to receive their firearm; preventing the transfer of a firearm to someone who's not legally qualified to receive a firearm, etc...this includes protection from liability in case someone who's not legally entitled to purchase or own a firearm, ends up receiving one. But then, there's SB 5078, which holds liable, any 'firearm industry member' (which includes FFL dealers).
Dealers are not only required to be licensed to SELL firearms, but ammo, as well…through this scheme. Having a FFL alone, wouldn’t be enough.
The dealers would also be required to file paperwork through the DoL, as well as run all their background checks through the WSP, via their SAFE system (which is scheduled to go on-line in July 2023, and be fully operation by Jan 2024, which is when this bill would go into effect, barring any unforeseen circumstances). ALL firearms transactions would be required (as opposed to transactions for semi-automatic rifles) to go through SAFE (all transactions would be centralized).
The Department of Licensing, would be the keeper of all the firearms records for purchases, dealers, as well as licensing. While it's not disclosed on whether these records would be made public, it's highly probable that any and all records relating to firearms licensing, actually WOULD be a matter of public record. This is essentially a de-facto database of firearms owners.
As had been mentioned before, this bill does absolutely nothing to curtail, or prevent gun crimes committed by criminals.
This bill would've been the golden opportunity to encourage education about firearms, gun responsibility, and offering benefits to FFL dealers who offer gun safety and gun responsibility courses.
But no. This is Olympia, and these criminals (pretending to be politicians) have once again shown their contempt for the US (and Washington state) Constitution, as well as 'rule of law'.
The bright side of this, is if there isn't any money appropriated (set aside) for this bill by June 30th, 2023, it dies.
No one should be surprised if this bill faces immediate injunction relief by our patriot allies...
This bill is a gross, disgusting infringement of our rights under the 2nd amendment (and likely other amendments, too), and must be stopped at all costs, like SB 5078.
This shows how scared they are when the "village" becomes upset about their taking away our rights to be free "men" and force the people to live by whatever agenda anti-societal they want.....mind controlled robots for their every whim, instead of free thinking and criticism
I think it could be tossed as illegal by the US Supreme Court, no court in this state would take the case.
IMO