State Attorney General, Law Enforcement Choose Sides on Gun Initiative

Posted

Yakima County Prosecuting Attorney Joe Brusic said law enforcement officers do not have to enforce the new initiative on semiautomatic rifles such as AR-15s because his office won't prosecute those cases anyway.

"I don't agree with this law and I am not going to prosecute someone under this law as it is now, with the wording that is has," Brusic said Thursday.

But state Attorney General Bob Ferguson says otherwise, calling Initiative 1639 constitutional and the will of the voters.

"Our office is confident that Initiative 1639 is constitutional, and we intend to defend it in court," Ferguson's policy director, Kate Kelly, said in an email.

Brusic's stance against I-1639, which places stiffer requirements on the purchase and ownership of semiautomatic rifles, is emblematic of several law enforcement officials across the state who say it violates the Second Amendment.

Brusic says the voter-approved initiative merely targets the gun rather than criminals.

"The gun is being seen as the perpetrator of the crime," he said. "The perpetrator is the person holding the gun."

Under I-1639, buyers of semiautomatic rifles are required to be at least 21 years old, complete a firearms safety course and undergo an enhanced background check that includes a mental health history. The initiative also requires guns to be secured and subjects gun owners to criminal charges if their firearms are used in crimes by someone else.

The initiative takes effect in July.

Yakima County Sheriff Bob Udell, Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer, sheriffs in Lewis and Ferry counties and Republic Police Chief Loren Culp all have said they will either not enforce the new law or not actively seek out cases.

And they don't have to, Brusic said.

"We enforce the laws, and if a law is created and we don't want to enforce it, we don't have to enforce it," he said. "We are going to use our discretion to not investigate or charge."



Brusic said officers use discretion often, such as when they decide not to issue a ticket after stopping a motorist for speeding or some other moving violation. Not enforcing the gun initiative is no different, he said.

"We understand that it's a law on the books -- we understand that," he said. "We just use discretion whether to charge it and that is within our purview, within our authority."

Washington State University criminal justice professor Craig Hemmens isn't as sure about the absolute discretion of prosecutors and sheriffs.

"I think it's an open question whether they have that discretion," he said.

There are several laws on the books that aren't enforced because everyone agrees they shouldn't be -- but not everyone agrees on this initiative, Hemmens said.

"It's illegal to spit on the sidewalk, but nobody gets arrested for it," he said. "But this is a little bit different."

Having elected officials sworn to uphold the law deem one statute unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it is unprecedented in Washington, Hemmens said.

"I didn't know these sheriffs are Second Amendment scholars -- that's pretty impressive," he said sarcastically. "The courts will decide that."

And that's what several law enforcement officials hope happens before the initiative takes effect. In November, the National Rifle Association filed a joint lawsuit with the Second Amendment Foundation in U.S. District Court challenging the initiative's constitutionality.

Hemmens said the Second Amendment -- the right to bear arms -- may not be as broad as many may think. Regulating the sale of guns isn't the same as interfering with the right to own a gun, he said.

"It will be interesting to see what the court, law enforcement officials and prosecutors do," he said.