Washington State Law Enforcement Groups Oppose Anti-Rights I-1639

Vote No Washington I-1639

As is frequently the case, the organization representing sheriffs in the state of Washington — those who are elected to their positions rather than hired by mayors, city managers, and boards of aldermen — have let it be known that they oppose Initiative 1639. Thanks to some creative legal interpretation by the Washington Supreme Court, the measure will appear on the November ballot in North California the Evergreen State.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms just issued the following press release announcing the Washington State Sheriffs Association’s opposition to I-1639, along with that of the Washington State Law Enforcement Instructors Association.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Washington State Sheriffs Association (WSSA), Washington Council of Police & Sheriffs (WACOPS) and Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association (WSLEFIA) are opposing Initiative 1639, the 30-page gun control measure on the November ballot.

“Law enforcement professionals recognize the extreme nature of I-1639,” said Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. “Not only does the initiative discriminate against gun owners, it classifies common recreational firearms as ‘semiautomatic assault rifles’ and requires gun buyers to surrender their medical privacy in order to exercise a constitutionally-protected right.”

The initiative is being pushed by the billionaire-backed Alliance for Gun Responsibility, a Seattle-based gun prohibition lobbying group. Statements from the three law enforcement groups were made public:

“Initiative 1639 is being promoted as a public safety measure; those actually working law enforcement know that IT WILL DO NOTHING TO STOP A SINGLE CRIME,” said WSLEFIA on its website. “This initiative has nothing to do with ‘assault weapons’ and is directed only at our good citizens who already pass multiple background checks before owning a firearm. I-1639 is an attack on civil rights and is an attempt to marginalize all firearm owners, including law enforcement officers. I-1639 will impair public safety, embolden criminals and impose burdensome restrictions on our most law-abiding citizens.”

“The Washington State Sheriffs Association, at their Sept. 26, 2018 meeting, made a motion opposing Initiative I-1639,” WSSA reported. “The motion carried. As the association representing the unique perspective of law enforcement leaders who have been directly elected by the residents of Washington’s counties, we look forward to continuing to engage and play a part in any changes in Washington’s firearms laws.”

WACOPS Executive Director Teresa Taylor added, “WACOPS believe that Initiative 1639 contains provision that are in clear violation of both state and federal individual constitutional rights, which, as law enforcement, officers, WACOPS members are sworn to uphold. In addition to the constitutional issues, this 30-page initiative, if passed, would impose significant restrictions on a citizen’s ability to possess and access commonly owned firearms for lawful self-defense.”

For more information, contact https://www.initiative1639.org/

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.

comments

  1. avatar Ralph says:

    It doesn’t matter what the sheriffs’ groups and the CCRKBA do or say. The State of Washington has been bought and paid for by the billionaire oligarchs who pull the strings.

    Congrats, Washingtonians. You are now officially serfs.

    1. avatar Defens says:

      Not always. I still have hope that enough FUDDs will get off their asses and vote this down. Our last anti-gun initiative passed by a very narrow margin, in contrast to the liberal polling that showed it would pass by a landslide. That initiative could very well have slid past FUDD radar, thinking it would not affect them. This new initiative – a dog’s breakfast of every anti-gun notion (short of bans and confiscations) that the Seattle Billionaires could throw in it – has something that stinks for every single gun owner. Hoping that this stirs the pro-gun voters, who do tend to head to the polls once incentivized.

      Even if it does pass – it will not be complied with, as with the previous initiative, which isn’t even enforced in most counties.

      1. avatar SoBe says:

        I am not sure that the FUDDs ever gave a darn about the Evil Black Rifle crowd before and they cannot see that they are threatened as well. I would not hold my breath counting on them. After all the same reasoning that conflated semi-automatic rifles and then all semi-automatic firearms with assault weapons (which BTW have select-fire actions not semi-automatic actions) could any day be extended to double action revolvers just as easily. After all, pull the trigger, BANG, another round is immediately ready to fire, just like semi-automatic actions. By the same deviant logical path one could now extend the conflation to pump action shotguns and lever action rifles, ad nauseum.

        1. avatar Southern Cross says:

          Hopefully even the FUDDS will see the intended overreach when their plinking and squirrel rifle is now an assault weapon, their Remington 7400 deer rifle is now an assault weapon, and their water fowling shotgun is now an assault weapon.

          Time will tell if the FUDDS will finally pull their heads out of the sand, or somewhere else where the sun doesn’t shine, and realize to anti gunners a gun is a gun is a gun. And the anti-gun people want all the guns gone along with their former owners.

    2. avatar MLee says:

      Maybe on the west side of the state, but on the east, like here in Spokane, we think quite differently.
      We’re not sheeple here nor bought and paid for.
      But as we all know, it matters little, it’s all about the west side. We are Petticoat Junction here on the East Side as far as they care.

      1. avatar Rocketman says:

        Might want to start thinking about some of the pro-gun eastern Washington counties becoming part of Idaho. Even if it doesn’t succeed that would put some socialist politicians on notice that gun owners have had enough and are wanting to get rid of politicians like them.

        1. avatar MLee says:

          A few ideas have been floating around. The best idea though is to split the state. The West would be Washington State and the East side, east of the Cascades would be its own state.

        2. avatar Hannibal says:

          Nice idea but good luck getting the other states to agree to it, as it would dilute their senate representation even more (particularly the populous states).

    3. avatar JasonM says:

      We still have the most regressive taxation in the country. And since we completely ignore I-594, I expect we’ll ignore I-1639, until the day the supreme court tosses it out. I-1639 also has the giant loophole that it only applies to the sale of rifles. I can buy an AR pistol or 10/22 receiver, convert it into a rifle, and never interact with this law.

      Also, don’t you live in the northeast somewhere? Or were those congratulations more of a welcome to serfdom?

  2. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

    This is a terrible bill that got on the ballot with a shady petition operation that the WA supreme court failed to protect the state against. It’s at least as bad as initiative 43 that we fortunately were able to defeat here in OR. Stay vigilant lest it happen in your state.

  3. avatar GS650G says:

    A handful of people are getting what they want and they don’t give a shit what law enforcement thinks. They will tell them what to do next. Guess who gets to enforce the law?

  4. avatar SteveO says:

    Dan-

    I would suggest a little rewording for the “Northern California” reference. I understood the intent that coastal Washington is “Coastal California, a couple lines North” with the blue coastal transplants, but there many fine, constitutionally-oriented citizens in Northern California – or Jefferson as some would prefer – that would put most people in “free” states to shame. This is coming from someone trapped behind the SoCal curtain that has the similar beliefs….I have utmost respect for our peers above the bay-capitol area. I would think that we would want to keep as many in the fold as possible vs alienating a bunch. What was Ben Franklin’s quote, “We either hang together or surely we hang as individuals”…

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Pretty close: “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”

    2. avatar JasonM says:

      Also, coastal Washington is quite rural and gun-friendly. It’s the south eastern shore of Puget Sound that causes all the problems.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        You guys should vote and annex them. Divide the state. Crappy inner city totalitarian laws should apply to their jurisdiction, not force fed to the whole state.

  5. avatar FedUp says:

    Interesting. The sheriff’s associations in Florida and Michigan are well known as freedom haters.

  6. avatar Mike H in WA says:

    “North California”… Hahahaha that’s funny… wait, I live here…

    No, no it’s not. Unfortunately, it is increasingly an accurate description.

  7. avatar JC says:

    States should use electoral system so one big city can’t run the state. Just sayin…..

    1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

      Hear hear. People in Portland are so out of touch that they’re typically surprised when I mention that the other 90% of the state consistently wants to secede from the Portland area.

  8. avatar JR Pollock says:

    I heard on the news today, that Paul Allen’s cancer has returned. Sucks for him..

    Oh well.

  9. avatar Zachary Gennaro says:

    Consider it as good as passed. We the sheeple want it. Children, safety, etc.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email