A lot of anti-gun states are seeking to ban certain semi-automatic firearms, a move that will likely set the stage for a full semi-automatic ban if allowed to fester as it is.
Washington State, for example, recently passed such a ban.
Unsurprisingly, gun rights groups stepped up to try and get the courts to issue an injunction to prevent enforcement of the ban while a legal challenge goes through.
It’s bound to be a fight, but gun rights groups got a bit of a setback on Friday.
Thurston County Superior Court Judge Allyson Zipp rejected a Moses Lake gun dealer’s request for a temporary restraining order halting enforcement of House Bill 1240, which prohibits the sale, distribution and importation of certain assault-style weapons.
Guardian Arms, the lead plaintiff, contended in legal filings that the state’s “assault weapons” ban violates the right to bear arms laid out in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Zipp issued her ruling from the bench Friday, according to a release from the state Attorney General’s office. A written order will be filed at a later date, the release stated.
Her decision comes nearly three weeks after a federal judge denied a similar request from gun rights advocates in a separate legal challenge. The plaintiffs, like Guardian Arms, argued the new law is unconstitutional.
“Considering the exceptional dangerousness of these weapons, the public interest in their regulation by the State outweighs the Plaintiffs’ desire to purchase more assault weapons,” Bryan wrote. “In light of recent mass deaths caused by assailants using assault weapons, it is appropriate for governmental bodies to find ways to protect the public from dangerous weapons, within the limits of the Second Amendment.”
Except, based on the Bruen decision, that’s not “within the limits of the Second Amendment.”
Now, both of these decisions are setbacks. I won’t pretend otherwise because, well, they are.
However, it’s also important to note that while the judges refused to issue an injunction on the enforcement of the Washington State law, these aren’t final decisions on the challenge itself. That’s still to come, and even if the judge does repeat this nonsense, there are additional steps to be taken.
That’s assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t opt to strike down assault weapon bans in general well before it goes too far.
Yet the damage here is still significant. This is basically mandating gun stores to stop selling the most popular model of rifle in the country. It’s telling people they can’t buy the most popular model of rifle in the nation.
It’s an infringement on the Second Amendment rights of the people of Washington state.
The truth is that the Washington state law is a big problem and will, in time, be struck down. The only real question is just how many lives will be ruined until it is. The judges are making the wrong call. What’s worse is that I think they know it.
They just don’t care because it’s not them who will feel the pain.
Or so they hope.