The following editorial originally appeared in The Seattle Times:
Over the past decade, Washington has positioned itself as a leader in gun laws that put safety first while still protecting the Second Amendment rights of residents.
This year, House Bill 1163 attempts to elevate the state when it comes to sensible gun regulation reforms. The safety of gun owners and the general public should always be the foundation of any gun legislation.
Sponsored by Rep. Liz Berry, D-Seattle, HB 1163 would require would-be gun buyers to obtain a permit to purchase the gun before they can acquire it. It would require fingerprinting, and the state’s 10-day waiting period — created by the Legislature in 2023 — would be incorporated into the time it takes for the permit to be processed.
Berry said the main goal of the bill is to reduce gun trafficking and straw sales of firearms.
Reducing the number of illegally obtained guns is a worthy cause and something that needs to be done to make our streets, schools and communities safer.
But HB 1163 would not keep those with illegal and deadly intentions from getting their hands on a gun. In fact, the intended purpose of the bill could backfire.
The bill also requires permit-seekers to have live-fire training. That could pose a problem for residents of meager means who feel they live or work in areas where their personal safety is in jeopardy.
Live-fire courses typically range from about $70 to $250, averaging approximately $140, with introductory courses generally priced between $100 and $150, according to Berry’s office.
The price of the permit has yet to be set by the Washington State Patrol, but WSP Chief John Batiste speculated recently that it would be around $75.
A $75 permit along with $140 for training could put the cost out of reach for many, and push them to obtain firearms by other means.
Lawmakers who are far removed from such reality should acknowledge that people will find a way to protect themselves and their families, regardless of the cost. They should revamp any legislation that ignores that fact.
The state’s current financial situation would make it difficult to subsidize the cost of the more expensive training. The Washington State Patrol should create less-costly training requirements that make it more feasible for consumers.
Some lawmakers have tried to make this bill about the cost to exercise one’s Second Amendment rights. It is not. It’s about acknowledging gun ownership as a constitutional right and a part of America’s culture.
State lawmakers should make sure it’s safe for owners and the general public, and equally accessible to all Washingtonians who are legally eligible to own a gun, regardless of their economic status.
