<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=192888919167017&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Thursday, March 28, 2024
March 28, 2024

Linkedin Pinterest

In Our View: Take Aim at Gun Backlog

Database essential to law enforcement deserves Legislature’s support, money

The Columbian
Published: December 21, 2016, 6:03am

Fiscally, creating an environment in which Washington’s firearms database can work for the benefit of law enforcement should be relatively simple for lawmakers. Politically, however, the issue is a bit stickier for many legislators.

A recent report from The (Everett) Herald revealed that the state’s listing of firearms purchases has a backlog of more than 300,000 transactions — and the problem is growing. The backlog stood at about 100,000 records in November 2013, but a sharp increase in gun sales in recent years has exacerbated the delay and left the available information woefully outdated.

The state Department of Licensing is tasked with updating the database of firearms sales, a database that frequently is used by law enforcement. The Herald reported that law-enforcement agencies throughout the state tapped into the information nearly 700,000 times between July 1 and Sept. 30 this year — an average of 7,679 times a day.

The information is used to reconnect legal owners with guns that might have been stolen, to provide a sense of how many firearms a suspect might have in their possession, and to track guns that were used in the commission of a crime. “It is an essential need for law enforcement,” said Mitch Barker, executive director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs. “We wish it was up-to-date because we’ve got to have that information.”

That is where the Legislature comes in. The Department of Licensing has requested $382,000 to hire a private data-entry firm to address the backlog, and Gov. Jay Inslee included the money in the budget he proposed last week. As part of a biennial operating budget of nearly $80 billion, such an amount would appear to be manageable, but similar requests in recent years have been rejected by lawmakers.

“We feel it is important,” said Brad Benfield, spokesman for the licensing department. “But the Legislature has to make a log of tough decisions each year and hasn’t gotten to this one yet.” Barker, of the sheriffs and police chiefs organization, was less diplomatic in his assessment: “Funding is a big issue, but there’s some political will to not make this work properly.”

Therein lies the political part of the equation. Many gun-rights advocates — and like-minded legislators — would prefer to scuttle the database rather than provide law enforcement with a tool that officials say is essential to helping them do their jobs. Those critics would prefer to have no information available regarding gun ownership, and to have no restrictions upon such ownership. Propagating a situation in which the database is ineffective and rendered useless to law enforcement is, in their minds, the next best alternative.

Such a stance, however, is irresponsible. In one example, Raymond Fryberg was subject to a 2002 protection order from the Tulalip Tribal Court that prevented him from owning guns. But the order was not entered into any state or federal database, and Fryberg continued to purchase guns — including one his son used to kill four people and himself at Marysville Pilchuck High School.

In short, there are good reasons for a database that is useful to law enforcement — reasons that should outweigh ideology. The frequent use the database receives demonstrates its importance. Lawmakers next year should choose to assist law enforcement officers rather than make their jobs more difficult.

Loading...