Ammoland: N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James Sues to Dissolve NRA

From Ammoland, N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James Sues to Dissolve NRA, detailing NY’s latest step in their months-long investigation into alleged NRA corruption and mismanagement.

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Thursday filed a civil lawsuit in New York Supreme Court, seeking to dissolve the National Rifle Association.

The move comes at a time when NRA is fully involved in the 2020 election process and will be interpreted by many as an effort to cripple the organization and reduce its political influence at a critical moment.

At the same time, the District of Columbia filed a separate lawsuit, naming the NRA and the NRA Foundation as defendants. This action was filed by Karl A. Racine, attorney general for the District of Columbia.

Fox News reported the NRA immediately responded with a countersuit against James, insisting the organization is following New York’s not-for-profit law. The NRA lawsuit asserts James is “targeting the organization for its political positions, violating its free speech rights,” Fox News said.

Fox also quoted NRA President Carolyn Meadows, who describes the New York lawsuit as “a baseless, premeditated attack.” She questioned the timing of the lawsuit.

“You could have set your watch by it,” Meadows said in a prepared statement. “The investigation was going to reach its crescendo as we move into the 2020 election cycle. It’s a transparent attempt to score political points and attack the leading voice in opposition to the leftist agenda. This has been a power grab by a political opportunist – a desperate move that is part of a rank political vendetta. Our members won’t be intimidated or bullied in their defense of political and constitutional freedom.”

Meadows, according to Fox News, insisted the gun rights organization “will not shrink from this fight – we will confront it and prevail.”

The 169-page New York lawsuit alleges that longtime NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre “has exploited the organization for his financial benefit, and the benefit of a close circle of NRA staff, board members, and vendors.” NRA is incorporated in the State of New York.

In addition to LaPierre and the NRA, the lawsuit names former NRA Treasurer Wilson “Woody” Phillips, Chief of Staff and the Executive Vice President of Operations Joshua Powell and General Counsel John Frazer as defendants.

The lawsuit alleges that “With the assistance of Phillips, Powell and Frazer, LaPierre abused his position as a fiduciary to the NRA to obtain millions of dollars in personal benefits in the form of undisclosed, excessive compensation, which includes in-kind benefits and reimbursements from the NRA and its vendors.”

The document further alleges that “LaPierre has undertaken a series of actions to consolidate his position; to exploit that position for his personal benefit and that of his family; to continue, by use of a secret “poison pill contract,” his employment even after removal and ensuring NRA income for life; and to intimidate, punish, and expel anyone at a senior level who raised concerns about his conduct.”

In a statement quoted by the Washington Examiner, James declared, “The NRA’s influence has been so powerful that the organization went unchecked for decades while top executives funneled millions into their own pockets. The NRA is fraught with fraud and abuse, which is why, today, we seek to dissolve the NRA, because no organization is above the law.”

In her complaint, James asks the court to find “that the NRA is liable to be dissolved pursuant to (a) N-PCL § 1101(a)(2) based upon the NRA’s pattern of conducting its business in a persistently fraudulent or illegal manner, abusing its powers contrary to public policy of New York and its tax-exempt status, and failing to provide for the proper administration of its trust assets and institutional funds; and/or (b) N-PCL § 1102(a)(2) because directors or members in control of the NRA have looted or wasted the corporation assets, have operated the NRA solely for their personal benefit, or have otherwise acted in an illegal, oppressive or fraudulent manner.”

Further, James asks the Court to rule “that the interest of the public and the members of the NRA supports a decision to dissolve the NRA.”

James is also asking the court to direct the individual defendants “to account, make restitution and pay all penalties resulting from the breach of fiduciary duties and their misuse of charitable assets for their own benefit and interests.” She also seeks to enjoin the defendants “from future service as an officer, director or trustee, or in any other capacity as a fiduciary of any not-for-profit or charitable organization incorporated or authorized to conduct business in the State of New York, or which solicits charitable donations in the State of New York, or which holds charitable assets in New York.”

Tanya Metaksa, who served as executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action—the organization’s political lobbying arm—told Ammoland News, “I hope it’s going to be a long fight. I think it’s all political.”

Metaksa, now retired, spent 4 ½ years in the position as NRA’s chief lobbyist. She also at one time served on the NRA Board of Directors.

Richard Feldman, an attorney who is also president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association, Inc., said via email, “Perhaps the biggest swamp in the DC area is located at Waples Mill Road! Time to drain that swamp.”

In 2007, Feldman authored a memoir of his time working at the NRA titled, “Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist.” He was both applauded and castigated within the firearms community, depending upon the perspective of each observer.

In a subsequent telephone conversation, Feldman added, “I think it sucks that the NRA leadership has put American gun owners in this almost untenable position.”

He asserted the timing of both lawsuits is purely political.

“They didn’t wait until after the November election to drop this,” he said.

If the NRA is forced to dissolve, that could put enormous pressure on other gun rights organizations to fill a void.

Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, and also chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, provided a statement to Ammoland News.

“I firmly believe that you’re innocent until proven guilty,” he said of the allegations contained in the civil lawsuits. “But it is also my belief that the NRA board of directors should have taken action when these allegations were first raised and preempted any action that could be taken by the New York State attorney general and the attorney general for the District of Columbia.”

In recent years, SAF has become a legal powerhouse, fighting dozens of court battles to advance Second Amendment rights, an effort he has often described as a campaign to “make the Second Amendment great again.”

“While there is no doubt both of these attorney generals are opponents of Second Amendment rights,” Gottlieb said, “and have an axe to grind, these are serious allegations that have not been put to bed by the leadership of the NRA over the last several years.

“Fortunately, for the gun rights movement,” he observed, “the strength of the NRA is not only in its leadership but in its members. Its members will not abandon the fight to protect Second Amendment rights.”

The National Shooting Sports Foundation—the firearms industry umbrella group—provided a statement to Ammoland:

“The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the firearm industry’s trade association, is troubled by the politically-driven decision of New York Attorney General Letitia James to seek to dissolve the National Rifle Association, America’s oldest civil rights organization. The lawsuit filed today by Attorney General James seeks to punish the over five million members of the National Rifle Association based on mere allegations of possible wrongdoing by a few individuals.

“NSSF is deeply concerned about the apparent political agenda to silence the strongest voice in support of the Second Amendment ahead of the election in November.

“This lawsuit, and one filed today by the District of Columbia Attorney General, should concern all Americans who cherish both the First and Second Amendments to our Constitution regardless of their views on what laws and regulations are appropriate to address the criminal misuse of firearms.”

The legal action launched by the District of Columbia Thursday was filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Division.

There have been no criminal allegations in either jurisdiction. Both lawsuits are civil in nature.

In the District complaint, Racine notes the NRA Foundation was “established to operate solely for charitable purposes related to promoting firearm and hunting safety.”

In his complaint, Racine asserts, “In recent years, the NRA has experienced financial problems related, in large part, to low membership and the NRA’s decision to continue to waste funds on improper, lavish spending. To plug financial holes caused by its own poor management, the NRA turned to the Foundation’s funds. Because the Foundation’s Board of Trustees and executives are dominated by the NRA, and the NRA had subverted the Foundation’s independence, the Foundation has allowed itself to be financially exploited through, among other things, unfair loans and management fee payments to the NRA.

“In allowing its funds to be diverted from charitable purposes and wasted to prop up the NRA in impermissible ways,” the District complaint continues, “the Foundation Board of Trustees has failed to provide meaningful oversight and failed in its fiduciary duties. Through this enforcement action, the District seeks injunctive relief sufficient to reform the Foundation’s lack of proper independent governance and a constructive trust over Foundation funds improperly wasted on the NRA.”

Later in the 24-page District complaint, the District observes, “Charitable corporations receive various federal and state tax benefits, including eligibility to receive tax-deductible contributions. Charitable corporations hold their assets for the benefit of the public and must ensure those assets are used for their intended and tax-subsidized purpose. Charitable corporations are not permitted to engage in or fund political campaign activity; may not engage in more than an insubstantial amount of lobbying activity; their assets may not inure to the benefit of insiders, and they may not be organized and operated for the benefit of private interests.”

With both legal actions coming 90 days before the national elections in November, many gun owners and Second Amendment activists, as Feldman and others observed for this story, will be immediately convinced this is a political maneuver to weaken the NRA at a time it needs to be strongest.

NRA-ILA: WA House Committee Passes Standard Cap. Mag Ban & CPL Restriction

From the NRA-ILA:

On January 31st, the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee voted to pass bills to ban most standard capacity magazines and make it more difficult to obtain a CPL. These bills will now go to the Rules Committee awaiting being pulled to the House floor. Please contact your state Representative and ask them to OPPOSE House Bills 2240 and 1315.

House Bill 2240, as passed out of committee, bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc. of magazines that hold more than fifteen rounds of ammunition. This measure is strongly supported by the Governor and the Attorney General. These so called “high capacity” magazines are in fact standard equipment for commonly-owned firearms that many Americans legally and effectively use for an entire range of legitimate purposes, such as self-defense or competition. Those who own non-compliant magazines prior to the ban are only allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances such at licensed shooting ranges or while hunting. These magazines have to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense.

House Bill 1315 requires onerous government red tape and further training to obtain a Concealed Pistol License. Mandatory training requirements are yet another cost prohibitive measure intended to ensure that lower income Americans are barred from defending themselves.

Again, please contact your state Representative and ask them to OPPOSE House Bills 2240 and 1315.

NRA: WA Committee Public Hearings on Anti-gun Bills, Jan 29 & 31

From the NRA-ILA:

January 29th, 2020, the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee will be holding a public hearing on several anti-gun bills. Additionally, on Friday, January 31st, the committee is scheduled to vote on two gun control bills that were heard last week.

Please contact members of the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee and ask them to oppose these bills!

Today, the committee will hold a public hearing on the following bills:

January 29th, 8:00AM
John L. O’Brien Building, House Hearing Rm A
504 15th Ave SW
Olympia, WA 98501

House Bill 2305 imposes a mandatory firearm prohibition for respondents of a Vulnerable Adult Protective Order. This order, which removes someone’s Second Amendment rights for up to 5 years, requires no criminal convictions or even charges. Due process limits restrictions on constitutional rights to only serious convictions and adjudications that provide procedural protections to the accused, which results in more reliable proceedings. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms should not be treated as a second-class right and should only be restricted when sufficient protections are in place.

House Bill 2622 modifies Washington’s existing firearm surrender provisions for individuals subject to a court order. This bill compels a respondent to appear and testify, under oath, on how and to what extent they complied with the surrender order. This is a serious encroachment on the right against compelled self-incrimination in any criminal, civil, or other government proceedings. Failure to appear would result in the individual being in contempt of court, thereby putting the individual in a no-win situation.

House Bill 2623 prohibits an individual from possessing firearms if they are convicted of the misdemeanor crimes of unlawful aiming or discharge of a firearm. This poorly conceived legislation even applies to airguns and slingshots, and has no exceptions for an individual aiming or discharging a firearm for self-defense purposes in location that would have otherwise not be authorized.

On Friday, the committee is scheduled to vote on the following bills:

House Bill 2240 bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc. of magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. This measure is strongly supported by the Governor and the Attorney General.

House Bill 1315 requires onerous government red tape and further training to obtain a Concealed Pistol License.

Again, please use the “Take Action” button above to contact committee members to voice your opposition.

NRA-ILA: WA Gun-Free Zone Expansion Bill on Senate Floor

From the NRA-ILA:

On January 13th, the Washington Senate pulled Senate Bill 5434 from the Senate Rules Committee back to the floor, where it can receive a vote at any time. SB 5434 was retained as a carry-over bill from 2019 that would expand “gun-free zones.”

Please click the “Take Action” button below to contact your state Senator and ask them to OPPOSE SB 5434.

Senate Bill 5434, sponsored by Senator Claire Wilson (D-30), would increase prohibited areas where law-abiding citizens cannot possess firearms, including CPL holders carrying for self-defense. The bill extended “gun-free zones” to public parks, libraries, and child care centers before being amended to only apply to child care centers. Anti-gun Senators can easily amend the bill to add more areas when it comes up for vote. Your voice is needed in this critical fight for our freedom and safety.

In addition to leaving law-abiding citizens defenseless against criminals who ignore arbitrary boundaries, child care centers would be required to publicly indicate they are “gun-free zones” by posting signs outside the facilities.

Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to contact your state Senator and urge them to OPPOSE SB 5434.

It’s also expect that the Senate Law and Justice Committee will be hearing on SB 6077 and an as yet unnumbered bill that would increase red tape and training requirements for concealed pistol licenses.

Senate Bill 6077 seeks to ban the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc. of standard capacity magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition.  This measure is strongly supported by the Governor and the Attorney General, and would severely limit your ability to defend yourself in a self-defense situation.

CPL Red Tape Bill, while this bill has not yet been filed and given a number, it is expected to increase government red tape and training requirements in order to obtain a Concealed Pistol License. This will be a different bill than the carryover bill heard in 2019.

Ammoland: NY Governor Cuomo Exposed by New Evidence in NRA Lawsuit

From Ammoland – New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Exposed by New Evidence in NRA Complaint

…According to a press release, the NRA filed a proposed Second Amended Complaint on December 20th 2019, citing documents provided by Lloyd’s this past June. According to the Memorandum of Law, the documents – and other information – “paint a stark and troubling picture of” the actions taken by the Cuomo regime. These included threats of adverse government action “delivered in off-the-record conversations and surreptitious backroom meetings” unless the company stopped doing business with the NRA.

According to a publicly released version of the Second Amended Complaint, the threats were backed up by fines levied against two insurance companies that did business with the NRA, including its Carry Guard insurance program intended to defray legal expenses from self-defense incidents. The coercion from the Cuomo regime eventually led those companies to sign settlements in which they agreed to cease doing any business with the NRA.

The track record of Andrew Cuomo should be no secret to loyal AmmoLand readers. While serving as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, he encouraged big cities to file lawsuits against firearms manufacturers, using the threat of bankruptcy via massive legal fees to coerce the gun companies to agree to restrictions that were largely rejected in Congress and most state legislatures. Did anyone forget that before the 2000 election, Cuomo had succeeded in forcing Smith and Wesson to accept terms that outraged law-abiding gun owners?

…The New York Times magazine noted that the Cuomo regime’s campaign has cost the NRA about $40 million in lost income and attorney’s fees in 2019 alone. Imagine how much $40 million could have done to promote the defense of our Second Amendment rights, training people to responsibly exercise their Second Amendment rights, or even training gunsmiths.

The stakes of the NRA’s fight with New York cannot be higher. As William Brewer told the New York Times magazine, “If they could do it to those guys, they could do it to me. They could do it to all of us.”

 

Colion Noir Interview on San Francisco’s NRA Irrationality

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors, in a fit of irrational pandering, last week passed a resolution declaring the NRA a domestic terrorist organization. A Rasmussen poll also found that 28% of Democrats believe that it should be a crime to join the NRA.

Colion Noir responds to these in this interview, noting that these Democrats are proving how relevant the Second Amendment is today as it was in 1791.

WA state: Anti-Gun Bills Pass Committe

From NRA-ILA:

During the January 24th executive session, the Washington state Senate Committee on Law & Justice voted to pass all of the gun control bills before them by a vote of 4-3.  They will now go to the Senate floor for further consideration.  Please contact your state Senator and urge them to OPPOSE these anti-gun bills.  Click the “Take Action” button and call 1-800-562-6000 to contact your state Senator.

The Proposed Substitute to Senate Bill 5062, sponsored by Senator Patty Kuderer (D-48), was filed at the request of Attorney General Bob Ferguson.  It would ban the possession of ammunition magazines with a capacity greater than 10, encompassing most standard capacity magazines commonly used by law-abiding citizens, such as with handguns popular for self-defense.  Those who own non-compliant magazines prior to the ban would only be allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances such as at licensed shooting ranges and nationally sanctioned sport shooting events.  These magazines would have to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense.

The Proposed Substitute to Senate Bill 5061, sponsored by Senator Manka Dhingra (D-45), was filed at the request of Attorney General Ferguson.  It would end the centuries old practice of manufacturing firearms for personal use, among other things.

Senate Bill 5174, sponsored by Senator Guy Palumbo (D-1), would increase the government red tape that law-abiding adults must go through in order to obtain a Concealed Pistol License by requiring a mandatory training course.

Senate Bill 5143, sponsored by Senator Dhingra, would require law-enforcement to seize firearms and ammunition when they are called to the scene of an alleged domestic violence incident and hold them for at least five business days.  This would result in property being confiscated without first going through due process and subjecting citizens to bureaucratic red tape to get their property returned.

Senate Bill 5027, sponsored by Senator David Frockt (D-46), would expand Washington’s existing Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO).  It would affirm that the ERPO can be issued against minors while also infringing upon the self-defense rights of law-abiding parents or others in the household without due process.

Thurston County Judge Strikes Down Illegal I-1639 Petitions

According to a news release from Save Our Security dated August 17, 2018, a Thurston County judge has stricken the Initiative 1639 petitions for being non-compliant with state law.

Today a judge on Thurston County’s Superior Court struck down the non-compliant and illegal forms used to gather I-1639 petitions.

We wish to commend the legal help from our allies at SAF and NRA in this fight. Keeping the ballot initiative process open and honest is important.

Barring any appeals to the state supreme court, this victory will stop I-1639 from appearing on the ballot. The well-funded anti-Second Amendment groups may have lost this time on a technicality, but rest assured, they’ll be back again next year.

The NRA followed up with their own article:

NRA Wins Lawsuit in Washington State, Prevents I-1639 From Appearing on Ballot

The Thurston County Superior Court today ruled in favor of the National Rifle Association and ordered a writ of mandamus to prevent I-1639 from appearing on the ballot. The judge agreed the signature sheets did not comply with state law – the font size was too small to be readable and didn’t include strikethroughs.

“The National Rifle Association is glad to see the court today recognized how negligent, if not worse, gun control advocates were in their signature-gathering for this ill-advised ballot initiative,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA. “We got involved because I-1639 tramples on the rights of Washington state voters, and because the way these anti-gun activists went about pushing their agenda was egregious. We applaud this decision, and will remain vigilant in protecting the constitutional freedoms of all Americans.”

Among other things, I-1639;

• Creates a gun registry for any transfers of commonly owned semi-automatic rifles;

• Introduces a 10-business day waiting period on the purchase of semi-automatic rifles;

• Imposes criminal liability on otherwise law-abiding gun owners who fail to store their firearms to state standards;

• Increases the age limit to possess or purchase semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21;

• Mandates training prior to purchase;

• And authorizes a $25 fee to be assessed to semiautomatic rifle purchasers.

The initiative proponents will likely appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court and we will continue to advocate on behalf of our law-abiding members in the Evergreen state.

Anti-gun WA Initiative 1639 Information

Initiative 1639 will be on the ballot this fall (2018) unless it is stopped by lawsuit. Titled “AN ACT Relating to increasing public safety by implementing firearm safety measures, including requiring enhanced background checks, waiting periods, and increased age requirements for semiautomatic assault rifles and secure gun storage for all firearms,” this billionaire-funded initiative is much more dangerous than that language implies. The initiative is facing lawsuits over reported illegal petitions.

Washington Arms Collectors published the following facts about I-1639.

Initiative 1639 – An Attack on Every Firearm Owner

Initiative 1639 has been filed with the Washington Secretary of State:
“AN ACT Relating to increasing public safety by implementing firearm safety measures, including requiring enhanced background checks, waiting periods, and increased age requirements for semiautomatic assault rifles and secure gun storage for all firearms.” We should all be informed of the contents so please go to the official copy online and read it, download it and print it out to share with others. Here is the web address:
This initiative is now in the signature gathering phase and if enough signatures are collected it will go directly to the voters, not to the legislature. If passed I-1639 will become law on July 1, 2019.
Every Semiautomatic Rifle is an Assault Rifle
Let me start with the initiative language that will do the most harm, the definition of an assault rifle.
I-1639 creates the following definition:
“Semiautomatic assault rifle” means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.”
The age of your rifle, collectability, ATF definition of the firearm as a Curio or Relic, caliber, rimfire or centerfire, tube or box magazine—none of this makes any difference, ALL semiautos are defined as assault rifles. Your kid’s .22 LR plinker is an assault rifle. Your Garand collection is a collection of assault rifles. Turn of the 19th to 20th century semiautos are assault rifles.
You say that you hate those black plastic stocked AR-style rifles and wouldn’t have an “assault rifle” in the house? Too bad, the anti-gun community has outflanked you this time by including all of your wood stocked semiauto hunting rifles, all 22 semiautos and just about every rifle created from 1900 to now. Oh, antiques and inoperable firearms are generously exempted. So it’s not just Modern Sporting Rifles that have been included but all semiautomatic rifles.
Registration of Rifles
How will this affect collector transfers, private transfers and all FFL dealer sales? Semiauto rifle transfers will be handled like pistols are now with additional forms, State registration and waiting periods.
The Department of Licensing is authorized to keep, “copies or records of applications to purchase pistols or semiautomatic assault rifles.”
Firearm Storage is Criminalized
We all secure our firearms the best we can. Some can afford safes and others lock them up or use locking devices. I-1639 defines safe storage as follows: “Secure gun storage” means: (a) A locked box, gun safe, or other secure locked storage space that is designed to prevent unauthorized use or discharge of a firearm.” Oddly this definition excludes gun locks! Yet the initiative itself requires gun locks be provided with every sale. It appears that if one secures a firearm using a locking device it is by definition not in “secure gun storage.” Read the definition again—a secure storage SPACE seems to be required. And if you fail to have such a space and someone uses your firearm to do harm, you are the criminal.
A new crime of “community endangerment” is created that will allow you to be charged and jailed if your firearm is taken and misused. Yes, if you have secured your firearms you may not be charged and in this section gun locks are mentioned along with secure storage. We all strongly support safe firearm storage but changing the law to shift the blame for a crime onto the victim of a crime is wrong. The message to the public and the legal system is that your formerly law-abiding gun ownership is a threat to the community.
Annual Verification of Eligibility
I-1639 will institute a system that annually reviews your record to determine your eligibility to own firearms. You should expect that medical records, mental health issues, and social security disability will all be reviewed to determine whether you can possess that old semiauto hunting rifle. And you thought we were trying to scare you with visions of the police at your door to confiscate your firearms.
Out of State Purchasers
Residents of other states have been able to purchase rifles and shotguns here in Washington. 1639 will end this reasonable practice for semiauto rifles. Our WAC members in Idaho and Oregon will be unable to come to our shows and collect these firearms.
No Longer an Adult at Age 18
At age 18, you can vote, you can be charged with a crime as an adult, be imprisoned or drafted and do other adult things but you can’t take your 22 rifle into the woods to plink and you can’t go hunting with a license and a semiauto. I-1639 judges you to be too immature to do these adult activities. Thinking about taking your semi to the range for practice or a DCM shoot Forget it—that would be illegal.
What can a 18 year old do with a semiautomatic rifle? Stay at home on your own property. That’s it. The initiative states that a person, “ eighteen years of age, but less than twenty-one years of age, may possess a semiautomatic assault rifle only: (a) In the person’s place of abode; (b) At the person’s fixed place of business; (c) On real property under his or her control.”
Seriously…if this becomes law you can’t take your children to the range to have some shooting fun with the 10-22.
Government Safety Training Required
This initiative has costs that will be borne by firearm purchasers and owners. A new regimen of “safety” training to be delivered by government agencies is defined. Will it be free? Of course not and the price is not stated or limited. Firearm accidents are near zero in Washington. Death by firearm is either a criminal act or a suicide—neither is preventable through any kind of safety training. Hunter Safety classes teach safety and public and private firing ranges all provide safety training. This requirement is a bogus attempt to incorporate public safety into 1639 and increase the costs and create obstacles to firearm ownership.
Trigger Locks required
And you thought that trigger locks were already required? Well yes they are—by Federal law every firearm sold must have with a locking device. This section appears to exist only so that the initiative can masquerade as a safety measure. Nothing changes.
Rifles are Taxed
Sure they call it a fee but this is a tax on semiauto rifles. A fee of $25 is to be assessed by dealers for the Department of Licensing to use in their registration of firearms.
Multiple Initiative Subjects
Washington law requires that an initiative deal only with a single subject. In I-1639 we have changes to the age of firearm ownership, fees which are really taxes, storage requirements, changes to the definition of rifles and more. Most of the law changes would be in RCW 9.41. Still, there are obviously multiple separate and significant issues,not a single subject. This initiative is also falsely titled as dealing with “assault rifles.” These are flaws that may allow challenges but will not necessarily prevent a ballot vote. Don’t count on our courts to protect your rights–begin the fight now.
This article from the GunNews magazine, Washington Arms Collectors, may be reprinted and distributed by all those acting in opposition to I1639.
See also https://saveoursecurity.net/ for more information about I-1639.
UPDATE: As of November 6th, 2018 it appears that Initiative 1639 has been voted into law. The age restrictions go into effect January 1, 2019 and the rest on July 1, 2019.
UPDATE 2: The SAF and NRA File Lawsuit Challenging I-1639. Click here for article.

The lawsuit challenges the measure on the grounds that it violates the commerce clause by banning sales of rifles to non-residents, and that it unconstitutionally impairs the rights guaranteed by the First, Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and Article I Section 24 of the Washington State constitution by preventing the sale to otherwise qualified adults under age 21 of certain rifles.

“We are also considering additional legal challenges,” SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb confirmed. “We are disappointed that too many Evergreen State voters were fooled into supporting this 30-page gun control scheme, despite overwhelming law enforcement opposition. This initiative is an affront to the constitutional rights enshrined in the Second Amendment and the Washington state constitution, especially for young adults.

“We’re determined to fight this egregious measure because constitutionally-protected rights should never be subject to a popularity vote,” he stated. “The wealthy elitists behind I-1639 want to turn a right into a regulated privilege. This measure was only designed to have a chilling effect on the exercise of a constitutional right by honest citizens while having no impact at all on criminals, and we cannot let it go unchallenged.”

Washington: Hearing Scheduled for Legislation to Ban Long Gun Purchases by Law-Abiding Adults

From the NRA-ILA and the Gun Owners’ Action League:

Tomorrow, February 27th at 8:30AM, the Washington state Senate Ways & Means Committee is scheduled to hear Senate Bill 6620, which includes provisions that would raise the minimum age to purchase many common semi-automatic rifles and shotguns to 21 years of age and would also establish a 10 day waiting period.  In addition, anti-gun legislators in Olympia also submitted House Bill 3004 on February 24th, a companion to SB 6620.  This comes just two weeks before the end of the current legislative session, as they rush to accomplish their agenda.

NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters are strongly encouraged to attend the committee hearing tomorrow morning to voice their opposition.  Also, please use the “Take Action” button below to contact Senate committee members as well as your state Senator and Representative and urge them to remove all anti-gun provisions in SB 6620 and HB 3004!  Click the “Take Action” button below to contact senate committee members and your state Senator and Representative.

Senate Bill 6620, sponsored by Senator David Frockt (D-46), and House Bill 3004, sponsored by Representative Laurie Jinkins (D-27), would raise the minimum purchasing age for semi-automatic rifles and shotguns in the State of Washington from 18 to 21 years of age based on cosmetic features.  Federal law already prohibits adults under the age of 21 from purchasing a handgun from a licensed firearm dealer.  Legislative proposals to prevent law-abiding adults aged 18-20 years old from acquiring modern semi-automatic rifles or shotguns would deny them access to the most modern and effective rifles for self-defense, thus depriving them of their constitutional rights.

This legislation attempts to brand these firearms as having “tactical features” to drum up unnecessary fear of their ownership.  In reality, these firearms are only being defined by aesthetic features that in no way affect the functionality of the rifle.  Semi-automatic firearms only fire one shot per action of the trigger, and such technology has been available to American consumers for over a century.  Semi-automatic firearms are commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for various purposes such as self-defense, recreation, competition, and hunting.

SB 6620 and HB 3004 would also establish what amounts to a 10-day waiting period for transfers of these firearms by requiring that they go through the state background check like handguns rather than the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that is currently used for all long gun transactions.  While federal law allows for such transactions to be completed if three days have elapsed from the time of the “delayed” response, the state check requires a wait of ten days in such a scenario.

We need serious proposals to prevent violent criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from acquiring firearms.  Passing a law such as this punishes law-abiding citizens for the evil acts of criminals.  The NRA supports efforts to prevent those who are a danger to themselves or others from getting access to firearms.  At the same time, we will continue to oppose gun control measures that only serve to punish law-abiding citizens.  These are not mutually exclusive or unachievable goals.

Again, please contact Senate committee members and your Senator and Representative urging them to remove all anti-gun provisions in these bills!

From GOAL of WA

GOAL Alert 2018-2
Legislative alert from Olympia 25 February 2018

HOUSE COUNTERPART TO SB 6620

ACTION NEEDED, NOW!

I’d say I’m sorry for the rush of messages, but I’m not. The rush is caused by end-of-session manipulation by Democrat “leadership” in Olympia, and calls for a strong response.

As I have posted frequently, it ain’t over ’til the fat lady sings. And she’s not scheduled to sing until midnight on 8 March (a week from this coming Thursday). While the legislature sets cut-off dates and other procedural processes to keep bills moving and cull out other bills, the bottom line is that these are not written in the state Constitution, they are internal rules adopted by the legislature and may be changed by the legislature at will.

The House has filed a “counterpart bill”, HB 3004, to SB 6620. A counterpart bill is a verbatim duplicate of the bill filed in the other chamber. If both pass unamended, it/they go straight to the governor for his signature.

SB 6620/HB 3004 is a 14 section, 28 page bill in their words, “Improving security in schools and the safety of our students.” What it is is a Trojan horse, gun control hidden under the guise of the standard Democrat mantra “It’s for the children.”

Part I of the bill is a single section less than one page in length and talks about unspecified funding for “school emergency response systems.” Part II, “Students protecting students,” is three more sections spread over 10 pages and discusses nominally establishes a program whereby students may – anonymously if so desired – report potential threats to school safety and sets out procedures, including court action, to be followed, as well as identity protection for all involved in the process up to and including law enforcement and court personnel.

Part III is the zinger, “Semiautomatic rifles or shotguns with tactical features.” 18 pages, 24 sections describing the offending firearms as semi-auto rifles or shotguns with detachable magazines (mostly the features such as pistol grip, thumbhole stock, flash hider, grenade launcher – the standard litany of evil features from the federal 1994 Clinton/Feinstein “assault weapon ban”). There are some omissions here but I’m not going to identify them. Please note that these definitions do not include tube-fed firearms or manually operated firearms.

The principal focus in Part III is shifting “semiautomatic rifles and shotguns” to the same category as that applied to handguns: they can only be sold to individuals age 21 and over, and are subject to the additional requirements for handguns: additional state paperwork and waiting periods (with the existing CPL exemption).

Keep in mind, under I-594 ALL firearm transfers must be processed by a licensed dealer, meaning that de facto registration already exists via the FFL’s required record-keeping, but this would effectively add offending semi-auto firearms to the state pistol registry, creating an on-line data base of such firearms.

It also increases the state firearm dealers license fee from $125 to $150.

Text of SB 6620: http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6620.pdf

Text of HB 3004 has not been posted yet, but the bill’s home page is at: http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=3004&Chamber=House&Year=2017:

It is the intention of legislative “leadership” to ram this bill through before the end of the session. How much time will be given to public testimony remains to be seen – at this point no public hearings are scheduled.

It is imperative that you contact your legislators as soon as possible to ask that they remove Part III from the bill. Parts I and II are likely legitimate, but Part III is strictly a ploy to use school and children’s safety as a cover for more gun control.

You can find your legislators by visiting: http://app.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder

Once you find your district, simply scroll down to see your Senator and Representatives listed. Click on their name and it will take you to their information, including a link to e-mail them.

Or you can call the Legislative Hotline tollfree at (800) 562-6000.

We need to flood the legislature with you going on record opposing Part III of SB 6620/HB 3004.

This is just step one on their agenda. There is already discussion of raising the age limit for the purchase of ALL firearms to age 21. The Bill of Rights does not impose an age limit on the exercise of fundamental, enumerated (listed) constitutional rights. Not to mention the fact that you can enlist in the military, or be drafted, and fight for your country at age 18.

If anyone receiving this is attending the WAC gun show in Puyallup today, please make copies of this and take them to the show. Thank you/.

WA Gun Bills Go into Effect

From the NRA-ILA

Source – NRA-ILA – click for article

Related – Home Alone in Washington State