In a stunning element of yesterday’s elections, Washington state passed Initiative 1693, which will enact the strictest gun control measures in the nation.
Although the initiative actually broke state laws, the high court allowed it to go through.
At least 60 percent of voters agreed to “Raise the age someone can purchase a rifle to 21, create an ‘enhanced background check system similar to what is used for handguns,’ require a person to complete a firearms safety training course to purchase a weapon, and create a common standard for secure gun storage.”
The initiative was touted as a way to prevent gun violence, despite empirical studies that show otherwise.
“My generation has been defined by gun violence. We have been defined by continued and repeated inaction by our elected officials,” Stephen Paolini ignorantly told supporters on Tuesday.
However, Alan Gottlieb, the Founder and Executive Vice President of the Second Amendment Foundation, said the group is ready to go to court over the legality of the measure.
“A handful of billionaires put in millions of dollars to buy votes and we were outspent,” Gottlieb said. “But while they were able to buy votes, our hope is they won’t be able to buy judges.”
The leftist campaign to erode and infringe on Second Amendment rights collected over $5.5 million, with much of that money coming from a few elite donors, like Nick Hanauer and the now deceased Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.
“For high-profile initiatives, there is almost invariably a lawsuit,” Ferguson told KREM-TV. “That’s the way the world works these days, and we’re prepared for that.”
The fact that one group of wealthy people, who won’t actually be impacted by removing a person’s right to have the ability to defend themselves, can spend the money to enact what many people consider an unconstitutional measure, is outrageous.
How many people in Washington will now be subjected to violent crime because they won’t have the tools needed to defend themselves?
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) challenged i-1639’s constitutionality this summer when questions arose about whether or not the petition’s format complied with state law.
The initiative’s proposed language violated the state’s Constitution.
The courts agreed, saying state law was clear and i-1639’s petitions were not within the bounds of the law.
Gun control groups can celebrate, but given the new face of the federal Supreme Court, many people don’t expect this initiative to last.
— Beth Baumann (@eb454) November 7, 2018