A Month After Passing Anti-2nd Amendment Law, Washington Authorities Still Baffled on How to Enforce itDecember 19, 2014
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/12/19/a-month-after-passing-anti-2nd-amendment-law-washington-authorities-still-baffled-on-how-to-enforce-it/Beyond the ideological divisions on the so-called “gun control debate,” laws that try to curb lawful ownership of firearms have one central flaw that is utterly inescapable: Only the law-abiding follow laws.
Criminals, as the name would suggest, do not; what madman is content with committing mass murder with a firearm but is stopped only by the hefty penalties of purchasing a firearm or carrying a firearm when ineligible?
Now, Washington State authorities are scratching their heads. Having hurried-up and passed an anti-Second Amendment law, few, apparently, considered how to enforce the law and are putting on the issue of law enforcement.
I-594 was approved by Washington voters in November. The law prohibits private sales of firearms and welcomes government into the transaction.
The law is an 18-page quagmire of jumbled legalese and unenforceable garbage and the state Attorney General has thrown-up his hands in desperation and has now tasked local law enforcement to do their best in enforcing this law that confuses even legal authorities.
The state Attorney General’s office has released a statement, saying,
“…Therefore, at this point we have no interpretations of the initiative to offer to the public beyond the text of the measure itself. Local law enforcement and local prosecutors typically enforce and prosecute firearms laws.”
For those who do not speak baffled lawyer, allow me to translate:
“This law is an absolute mess and practically unenforceable; so, I now ask local law enforcement to, you know, just do the best you can and make up the law as you go along.” If the state’s top law enforcer cannot figure out how to enforce the new provisions, surely the police cannot be expected to know, right?
How about the citizens? What should they do if they’re being unfairly arrested for breaking a law that may or may not prohibit their actions? Contact the licensing bureau?
I wouldn’t.
The Department Of Licensing issued a statement clarifying that they know nothing:
“Please contact your local law enforcement agency if you have questions about firearms licensure requirements, clarification of definitions, violations of the law or need additional information regarding exemptions…. Again, the Firearms Program staff cannot provide legal advice or help the public or licensed firearm dealers interpret the firearms statutes found in RCW 9.41 or I-594“ Washington voters were fed a lot of misinformation about I-594; while Second Amendment advocates warned that this was a registration scheme, supporters maintained that this was purely a background check initiative and that family members would receive an exemption, but that only person-to-person transfers done outside of an immediate family were required to submit to a background check.
Progressivestoday.com, however, notes that that is not how the law is being interpreted:
You may notice a couple of concerning lines in that statement, such as
“This program’s role in the implementation of Initiative 594 is limited to record keeping requirements.” If a background check is all this is, then why does a state agency keep records?
The I 594 supporters continually said all along that this is not a registration scheme, so what are these records that are kept?
Towards of the end of the statement, we also see
“To report possession or ownership of a pistol acquired upon the death of the prior owner after December 4, 2014, contact the Firearms Program at 360.664.6616 or email at firearms@dol.wa.gov.” Since transfers to immediate family members are exempt from having to go through the background check process, why does there need to be any reporting of inheritance of a firearm?
The Washington State Police want nothing to do with enforcement of the state law, either, as they didn’t arrest anyone who participated in the “I Will Not Comply” rally that took place on December 13th, where 1,000-2,000 stood outside of the capitol building in Olympia, transferring and selling guns back and forth in an open defiance of I 594.
The Vancouver police department has a vague statement on their webpage that punts the ball back to the Department of Licensing, while Seattle PD has remained silent.
To demonstrate how easy it is for someone to break this new law, on the moment it went into effect, activists made a video of a firearms sale taking place on the street in downtown Vancouver, with nary a law enforcement officer in sight to do anything about it.
Lewis County prosecutor and sheriff have released statements saying they will not enforce it.
So the question now becomes
“If no one wants to enforce a law, is it still a law?” To answer the above question, no; the Second Amendment protects our right to keep and bear arms and, just as importantly, it is the only amendment that clarifies in crystal-clear wording that this right shall not be infringed.
In this context we see that
A) the Second Amendment supersedes this new law and that
B) nobody is willing to interpret or enforce the law.
Therefore, the rule of law continues on its slide towards irrelevancy in America.
