Washington State Gov. Jay Inslee on Tuesday signed House Bill 1143 which, among other things, mandates proof of firearms safety training within the past five years to purchase any gun, an expansion of the requirement included in Initiative 1639 back in 2018 that required proof of training before one could purchase a so-called “semi-automatic assault rifle.”
BULLETIN: Gov. Inslee on Tuesday signed not only HB 1143 but also HB 1240, prompting a federal lawsuit by the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court.
Last year, Oregon voters, by a narrow margin, passed Measure 114 with a similar requirement, but that initiative is now tied up in the courts and has yet to be enacted. In reaction, Beaver State Democrats are now pushing legislation—Engrossed Senate Bill 348—which will require a permit-to-purchase and proof of training in order to buy a firearm.
Translation: Gun purchasers must first offer proof they have taken a safety course before they can buy a gun.
One could argue the safety training requirement is the way Northwest Democrats are attempting to discourage citizens from buying guns, same as the Southern Democrats of the late 1800s and early 1900s tried to discourage minorities from voting.
What’s the difference between such a requirement before exercising your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and passing a “literacy test” before being allowed to vote?
AmmoLand News posed that question to a veteran civil rights attorney. His one-word response: “Nothing.”
Along with other gun control proposals, including a 72-hour waiting period for gun buyers, the legislation “would impact tens of thousands of Oregon gun purchasers, and hundreds of Oregonians have submitted testimony,” according to the Oregon Capital Chronicle.
Late last year, Democrat Inslee told a press conference about his desire to require training in order to get a permit to purchase a firearm.
“You need to get a license to drive a car in the state of Washington,” he stated. “You need to get a license to go fishing. It’s time that you get a license to make sure that you have safety training to purchase a gun in the state of Washington, and it’s high time that we pass a bill to make sure you get a permit before you purchase a firearm.”
According to the new law, “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.
“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.”
Driving is a privilege, and so is recreational fishing, but owning a firearm is a right protected by both the state and federal constitutions. It is a difference that Inslee, who was an attorney prior to becoming a career politician, should recognize even with closed eyes.
In Washington state, the right to bear arms is protected by Article I, Section 24 of the state constitution. The pertinent language says this: “The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired.”
Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, matter-of-factly observed that the state requirement for training “seems like an impairment.” Under the U.S. Constitution, it might also be considered an “infringement,” which is prohibited under the Second Amendment. Is it grounds for a federal civil rights lawsuit?
The strategy in Washington is to bypass the state courts because the state Supreme Court does not appear to have a single moderate or conservative on the bench. However, this is the same court that upheld last year the state’s long-standing firearms preemption law when the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association sued the City of Edmonds for trying to enforce a so-called “safe storage” ordinance. The case was known as Bass v. City of Edmonds. It was a smackdown that also effectively nullified a similar ordinance adopted by the City of Seattle about the same time Edmonds passed its requirement, and explains why anti-gun Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell desperately wants the preemption law repealed. Earlier this year, the Democrat-controlled Legislature let that proposal die for the umpteenth time.
“Proof of training” does appear to be the kind of thing that begs court challenge. After all, as Gottlieb said, “This isn’t about guns, it’s about rights.”
About Dave Workman
Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.
The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to Limit the government not the citizens.
If we were spiteful, we would pass a law that put a cooling off period before democrats could post on social media, as well as a training and licensing regime to post, and a tax per post. A license and intelligence test would be required for reporters from cnn, cbs, npr, abc, msnbc, etc. But that would be unconstitutional, so we don’t. Free men and women require no permission to exercise our rights, and the gov is prohibited from infringing on our rights, especially to keep and bear arms. Penalties for violating the Constitution must be forthcoming. As well as… Read more »
“Penalties for violating the Constitution must be forthcoming. As well as for violating their oaths.”
Until this very necessary law is enacted our rights will continue to be ignored.
But if a Sate did pass such a law, independent of political persuasion, it would quickly be found unconstitutional and become a reference point for other rights.
In that light, we could propose the same restrictions and prerequisites for the first amendment that they put on the second, simply to display how ridiculous and unconstitutional they are.
That’s what I was trying to say and I’ve been saying it for years. Not sure I ever posted here though.
QUICKLY???
BAHAHAHAHahahahahaha
NY SAFE Act passed in 2013 . . .
. . . . . . . . still waiting.
Sure, lawsuits against 2A infringements move slow. But I think a law mimicking those infringements but instead restricting the media, ‘news and social’, would fly through the courts. Just my opinion but that’s my bet.
Here’s the thing: certain states — and Oregon is one of them for sure — are permanently lost to patriots. Any patriot living in Oregon who can, should move to a Red State. Let the liberals in Oregon take away citizens’ right to defend themselves, and then see what happens to them. Patriots can watch from afar … hopefully, without any cruel enjoyment as sweet white liberals have their shops looted, their cars hijacked, and their homes invaded. It’s already happening, in fact. Patriots must learn from history: most Jews remained in Hitler’s Germany until it was too late. (Google… Read more »
Thats what is happening in California, when I first moved there it was a red state since then it changed dramatically and why I moved to a Red State!
Just want to note that SAF and CCRKBA are immediately in the fight. NRA is busy converting memberships into new suits for PeeAir.
Negotiating Rights Away just solidified their irrelevance with the vote to continue supporting its corrupt regime.
I wonder if my DD-214 is good enough as “proof of training”. Probably not for the liberals.
Article says training from a law enforcement agency or nationally recognized organization which customarily offers firearms training. Could be wrong, but I consider the department of defense to be a nationally recognized organization and believe that firearms training is one of their many specialties.
That said, I’m with you – doubt they’d accept it. Didn’t see in article, but I’m wiling to bet there is a time limit as well – as in must have taken a course within last six months or year or whatever.
May not fly, but it would be fun to try.
Tie the LibTards in knots with their own language.
Isn’t that one of Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”?
Rerad the article. It clearly states “in the past five years”.
That might cover you if your active duty and for a few years after. The way I interpret that provision is you will have to retrain every five years. It has nothing to do with safety, it’s just another financial barrier. Maybe some based sheriffs will offer citizens free or low cost training.
Nope. That’s the wrng approach.
We MUST dump this garbage, not figure out how to game it or get by it. It is WRONG.
These dirtbag poltiians delight in removing our rights and liberties, then charging a fee somehow to “get them back”. Sort of like Mommy bringing home a package of Oreos and keeping them secured, handing them out one at a tme “if you’ve been good”.
Nope. Make the whole thing go away. Wrong from the git go.
Me too, also I was a demolition specialist, does that mean I can get explosives too
Democrats would have to research DD-214 to find out what it is.
Nothing wrong with training, but no law required.
I am a retired police officer and have trained and trained citizens, especially women how to use their firearms.
Safety is the most important thing about using a firearm but passing a law to buy one is against the Constitution
Poll tax – all that needs to be said.
Additionally, I don’t know of any state that requires a Driver’s (or any other) license to purchase a motor vehicle. Or to operate one on private property.
Same thing with ‘shooters’ / ‘gun owners’ insurance.
It’ll be just like car insurance in a few years, you’ll still be essentially self-insured, except with the fee and legal onus of having to still acquire insurance; they will take your ‘guns’ due to your negligence in failing to provide for your potential liabilities, and god help you if you ever have a claim.
One major difference: insurance will never cover an illegal act, i.e. crime. And that’s the excuse the antis are using for the insurance requirement.
Wasn’t it the Dems that instituted the “literacy test” before blacks could vote? (In the south)
If you want to know what the Dems are doing, all you have to do is listen to what they accuse the Repubs of doing!
As it says in the 4th paragraph above.
Thanks for reading and sharing thi AmmoLand report.
ackshully a fishig license also violates our right to the produce of the land. However I don’t have much of an issue with fishing licsnses as the system does help manage and protect the resource, sets reasonable limits on seasons and catches whci also goes to assure the fish will be here in an hundred years. god put those fish in the water as food for us. To demand a license to “take and eat” does not seem right. That aside, JayZee’s idiotic move to license and/or mandate “training” is most definitely an infi=ringement. No ne needs to prove they… Read more »
Are the fish gov property? If not, by what authority do the feds license others to fish in the area? Are the deer gov property, or on gov property? If not, why should one pay for permission to hunt the wild game? Who gave the gov permission to oversee the deer and fish … and charge fees to hunt/fish?
Texas will make you pay restitution to the state if you kill a deer out of season or kill an unapproved deer. They apparently belong to the state. Funny how the state doesn’t have to pay me when one of their deer damages my vehicle.
If ownership is the basis of your argument, then neither are the fish or deer yours. Absent regulation, some people would kill a thousand deer a year or thousands of ducks a year. Greedy people have wiped out several wild life species and modern greedy people would continue to do the same. Sportsmen recognized this state of affairs, and requested government intervention in the form of the Lacey Act and the Pittman-Robertson Act. Government got involved at the request of sportsmen, and the system has successfully brought back the herds and flocks of the remaining wild life. Unfortunately, government is… Read more »
“Driving is a privilege, and so is recreational fishing” I beg to differ with you. Driving is a right, and is subsumed in the widely recognized right to travel in the same way that all types of weapons are subsumed in the right to keep and bear arms. Gun owners and rights proponents should take note of the way the government has limited our rights in this area uncontested and now uses that violation as an example to justify their similar burdening of other rights. Same applies to fishing and hunting. You have a God given right to do so… Read more »
Driving is not a right. You have feet.
There is a right to travel in the US that does not spell out any matter of conveyance. As the 2nd applies to modern firearms, as the 1st applies to modern communication, the right to travel applies to modern conveyance.
https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl/vol30/iss4/1/
An even better collection of citations supporting the right to drive without license or other burden so long as it is for personal reasons and not for commerce, for trade, or for hire.
https://www.uslawbooks.com/travel/travelcites.htm
Article 4 of the Aritcles of Confederation as well as the 14th Amendment support the right to travel.
Driving is a right according to the 9th amendment and Justice Tolman, “The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Do you have a citation for that quotation, please?
Here you go Wild Bill. It’s about 2/3 down the page. The case is Thompson V Smith 1930 VA Supreme Court. It is not attributed to Tolman though.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3467100988685921366
Thank you.
Justice Warren W. Tolman
Here are more of his thoughts on it and some Supreme Court cases denoting the difference between citizens traveling and using the roads for commerce.
https://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/DLbrief.shtml
As a side not to my comment above, it’s rather telling how many downvotes one gets when advocating FOR rights. It’s almost as if there are a good number of statists here who love government regulation.
Thank you.
You’re welcome.
Let’s see what happens when you get pulled over without a drivers license or insurance.
Well if over 50 years of Safe Gun Handling, Former RSO, and Former NRA Certified Rifle/Pistol Instructor (Ret.) isn’t good enough, then F**k ’em.
Can’t believe any sane person would continue residing in this commie state. You’re not going to change these commie traitors; they have control and will cheat in every way to keep it. Best to relocate to a Free State, like Idaho or Texas and plan to fight to keep it Free.
Well, there are a lot of sane people here in WA State that plain can’t afford to just get up and leave. It is a sign of the times. If I could, I would leave this place in a heartbeat, even at my age..
You would be welcome in Alabama, just don’t bring any liberal ways and friends
Thanks! I don’t have liberal ways or ANY liberal ‘friends’.
The plan is in place and in a couple of years happiness will be defined as WA ST in my rear view mirror. It wasn’t always that bad here.
if that were the correct way of handling such issues, we’d none of us be here. Study that period between about 1720 and 1790. There were legions of control freaks, business-minders (as long as it was YOUR business THEY were minding), taxes, restrictions, buses, etc, by those clowns in red coats. They removed the lawfully established governments in most of the colonies, replacing those with their own officers. They prohibited citizens to gather and meet other than for church. Guess what THAT led to…. yup. Political and econoimic matters being discussed and dealt with on sundays as part of, or… Read more »
Not all can exit immediately, by any number of constraints. The other thing is if you don’t stay and fight wherever evil exists, you will eventually be without a place, or country to fight for.
Driving is a privilege, owning a Firearm is a RIGHT! Illiterate Democraps & some Right-Wing Rinos need to take a test on the Constitution on how it was written over 200 years ago!
The automobile took the place of a horse. Did they see horseback riding or wagons as a privilege ? When autos first came out there was no need for a license. It was not a privilege but a choice. Would you rather drive a car or ride a horse. Fishing is another. Just more Govt overreach that the people fell for. Look at the taxes collected from both. That is what drives the overreach of Govt. Take away the money. See if its a privilege then.
Very interesting! If this stands, then maybe we should have mandatory training before someone is allowed to cast a ballot! Oh, and if becoming a citizen requires demonstrating proficiency in the english language, why are ballots printed in foreign languages??
Literacy tests were deemed illegal by the 1964 Voting Rights Act. Which ironically members of the Democrat leadership fought against. Including Robert Byrd, Grand Dragon of the KKK and Senator of West Virginia. Who Hillary Clinton considered her mentor and the reason she entered politics. Joe Biden spoke at his Eulogy calling him the greatest leader in the history of the Democrat party
“It is a difference that Inslee, who was an attorney prior to becoming a career politician, should recognize even with closed eyes.”
Sounds like Inslee was a sh!tty city prosecutor…. BEFORE he was a sh!tty Governor.
“Permit to Purchase” = Registry to Confiscate
(Along with background checks for ammo purchases that keep a record of sale in a state police database) We see you purchased some 5.56, Hmmmm
It’s the new strategy.
They found out when the NY SAFE Act had a 4% compliance rate to turning in or disposing out of state your AR15 type rifles, that without a registry, they can’t do what they want to do.
EFFECTIVELY DISARM THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY
PERIOD.