Initiative summary [You can find the whole text of it here] The initiative creates a definition of an "assault rifle" as follows: "Semiautomatic assault rifle" means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.



"Semiautomatic assault rifle" does not include antique firearms, any firearm that has been made permanently inoperable, or any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action. It then creates a number of changes to ownership and acquisition of such rifles, including: Requiring a training, to be renewed every five years, for purchasing any semiautomatic rifle

Requiring all semiautomatic rifle purchases to be approved by local law enforcement authority

Applying the same process for purchases of all semiautomatic rifles as it currently exists for handguns - but without the exception for people with concealed pistol license and with a mandatory 10 day waiting period

Amending that paperwork to state that owning guns is a danger to the purchaser

Establishing a fee, up to $25 to fund all of the above

Banning sales of semiautomatic rifles to out-of state residents

Establishing the minimum age of 21 for purchasing semiautomatic rifles

Banning possession of semiautomatic firearms for people under 21 outside their property boundaries

What are the problems with this initiative? It's a lie.

Here is how a semiautomatic rifle is defined in US law: 18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions

(28) The term “semiautomatic rifle” means any repeating rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge. >



- Cornell Law School 18 U.S. Code § 921 - Definitions As mentioned above, here is how I-1639 defines "semiautomatic assault rifle": "Semiautomatic assault rifle" means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.



— Secretary of State - Initiative Measure No. 1639 - finaltext_1531.pdf They took the existing legal definition of a semiautomatic rifle and renamed it a "semiautomatic assault rifle". So now every semiautomatic rifle is an "assault rifle". The rifle doesn't need to be an AR-15. It doesn't need to look like an AR-15. It doesn't need to be "high powered", or "military", or even "military-looking". It doesn't even need to have a removable magazine. Just the fact that it is a semiautomatic makes it an "assault rifle". For example, this Marlin 60 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlin_Model_60) would be styled an assault rifle under this initiative. This rifle uses a tubular magazine which is not removable. It uses 22LR ammunition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Long_Rifle) which is primarily used for very small game such as squirrels and rabbits. This is how 22LR round looks next to ammunition commonly used in an AR-15: Or this SA-22 rifle from Browning which has been in production for more than 100 years: It also doesn't have a removable magazine, and it also uses 22LR ammunition. Of course, not all semiautomatic hunting rifles are using low power ammunition, or don't have detachable magazines. This Browning BAR Mark III uses a high powered hunting cartridge and a detachable magazine. Yet of course it also has nothing to do with either military or assaults. These are not the only examples. Ruger 10/22, Savage 64 and many, many other classic American hunting rifles would get the "assault" stigma under this initiative. What is the reason they put "assault" in the definition? Obviously, to scare people into voting for the initiative. Question is, do we want to vote on a law based on the lie?

It is based on a lie The deceptive definition is not the only part of the initiative that is dishonest. The very premise of it is also a lie. Gun violence is far too common in Washington and the United States. In particular, shootings involving the use of semiautomatic assault rifles have resulted in hundreds of lives lost, devastating injuries, and lasting psychological impacts on survivors, their families, and communities. This statement is absolutely not backed by data. Here are the actual numbers of people killed by rifles in Washington in the last 10 years. These numbers include all rifles, not just semiautomatic ones. Source: FBI Uniform Crime Reporting - Crime in the U.S. 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Murders by rifles 2 16 4 1 4 0 6 3 11 % of Total Murders 1% 9% 2.6% 0.6% 2% 0% 3.5% 1.4% 5.6% Keep in mind that it is ALL rifles, semiautomatic and otherwise. To put this number in perspective 4.7 people killed by rifles in the state of Washington on average over the last 10 years is less than the death toll from stings and bites (6 in 2015), 4 times less than the number of people stabbed to death or drowned in boating accidents (20 and 18 respectively in 2015). At 0.06 per 100000 residents, it is 170 times lower than the lowest of the 10 leading causes of death for Washingtonians, which is flu and pneumonia. You are 170 times more likely to die from flu than be killed by a rifle. Age adjusted. [Source: Washington Department of Health - Health Statistics] Even in mass shooting events handguns are present more often than rifles, and there is an even breakdown in casualties whether a rifle was present or not. Creating restrictions on something that represents a tiny fraction of homicides is not going to affect homicide rates in any measurable way.

It is draconian The restrictions that I-1639 puts on semiautomatic firearms vastly exceed current regulations on pistols. Pistol purchases do not have mandatory waiting periods. They can be picked up immediately after the police background check is complete, and if the purchaser has a concealed pistol license, the dealer conducts the background check and the transfer happens on the spot. There is no such exception for semiautomatic rifle purchases.

Handgun transfer can happen between family members: parents can gift their children pistols for hunting and target shooting. There is no such exception for semiautomatic rifles. A person who could enter a Project Appleseed competition with their parent's 10/22 rifle would lose this ability once they become 18 years old.

Similarly, this bans anyone under 21 from using a semiautomatic rifle for hunting and target shooting. Many competitions require semiautomatic rifles.

There is no training required for handguns.

There are no fees for extra background checks for handgun purchases. It denies a large number of people access to an important class of firearms without presenting any public benefit.

It is regressive This initiative hits poor people the hardest. The least expensive adult-sized rifle available on the market today - Savage 64F - happens to be semi-automatic. It costs only $130 at Cabelas, the state's biggest firearms retailer. Many other inexpensive entry-level rifles are also semi-automatic and sell in the same price range. This initiative imposes a $25 fee plus the cost of training. A similar class at Cabelas costs $85. This almost doubles the cost of an entry-level rimfire rifle. A popular and inexpensive way to introduce one's children to shooting sports will be out of reach for poor people if this initiative becomes the law.

It is hypocritical You have probably heard the expression "even if it saves one life, it is worth it". The fact is, we can save many lives by banning alcohol. For example, drunk drivers kill 200 children under 15 every year [Source: CDC Imparied Driving Factsheet.] Experts estimate that as many as 1-5% of all children are born with alcohol-related birth defects [Source: Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders - Data & Statistics.] Yet the same people who clamor for restricting firearms would not support placing further restrictions on their own drinks - even though that would save many more lives.

It is a billionaires' initiative, not peoples'

How can we defeat I-1639? First, register to vote. It is super easy in WA - online registration is available here: https://weiapplets.sos.wa.gov/MyVoteOLVR/MyVoteOLVR. But please don't delay - online registration deadline is October 8, 2018 (in-person deadline is October 29, 2018). All you need is your driver's license or state ID. If you think you are already registered - it doesn't hurt to check the currency of your registration. Go here: https://weiapplets.sos.wa.gov/MyVote/, all that's needed is your full name and date of birth. November 6, 2018 is the date. Make sure you do not have any urgent appointments, but better yet - vote by mail. It's quick, it's painless, and the state even pays your postage! There really is no excuse for not voting! Once your registration is in place, do ask your friends and family to vote as well. Once a civil right is gone, bringing it back would be excruciatingly difficult - maybe impossible. A little bit of legwork upfront will save us massive amounts of trouble in the future. Share this page on Facebook, email it to your friends and family, post it on Reddit. Let's make sure that people know that i-1639 is not just about safe gun storage, and let them vote accordingly!