By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
When Washington state starts collecting $126 from each gun owner for their mandated permit-to-purchase next May 1—under a law pushed through by Democrats and opposed by Republicans—it is likely to be quickly challenged by essentially every gun rights group on the map, on both state and federal constitutional grounds.
Reason Magazine is reporting the breakdown as $90 for the permit and $36 for a fingerprint background check.
But there will be other costs, according to Reason. In a short article posted Tuesday, Reason noted, “Licensees must also, at additional cost, complete a state-certified gun safety course, which includes live-fire exercises and covers safe storage, suicide prevention, and the use of deadly force.”
The permit must be renewed every five years for $90, “and existing concealed pistol or hunting license holders are not exempt.”
According to Reason, the Washington State Patrol (WSP) “expects 200,000 applicants in its first full year, potentially generating over $25 million in fees.”
Kevin Baird, commander of the WSP Firearms Background Division, “The fees for the permit to purchase will be used to fund the operations of the program. However, the $36 for the fingerprint background check fee is not retained by our program, so it’s more like $18,000,000. (200,000 X $90 (the permit fee)).”
Baird provided the relevant state statute language about where the money goes:
Under one statute, “The Washington state patrol firearms background check program may charge permit application fees which will cover as nearly as practicable the direct and indirect costs to the Washington state patrol incurred in creating and administering the permit to purchase firearms program. The Washington state patrol firearms background check program shall establish a late penalty for late renewal of a permit to purchase firearms. The Washington state patrol firearms background check program shall transmit the fees collected to the state treasurer for deposit in the state firearms background check system account created in RCW 43.43.590.”
Another statute explains, “The state firearms background check system account is created in the custody of the state treasurer. All receipts under RCW 43.43.580 and 9.41.121 must be deposited into the account. Expenditures from the account may be used only for the creation, operation, and maintenance of the automated firearms background check system under RCW 43.43.580, and for costs incurred in establishing and administering the permit to purchase firearms program under RCW 9.41.121. Only the chief of the Washington state patrol or the chief’s designee may authorize expenditures from the account. The account is subject to allotment procedures under chapter 43.88 RCW, but an appropriation is not required for expenditures. The account must provide reimbursement of any amounts appropriated for the purposes of initial establishment of the permit to purchase firearms program by June 30, 2029.”
The Second Amendment was incorporated to the states via the 14th Amendment by the U.S. Supreme Court in its ruling in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago. As a result, state laws may be challenged on federal constitutional grounds.
The Second Amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The Washington State Constitution’s right-to-bear-arms provision (Article 1, Section 24) reads, “The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.”
In a 1943 U.S. Supreme Court ruling—in a case known as Murdock v. Pennsylvania—authored by the late Justice William O. Douglas, the high court stated, “A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution… The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down.”
Ironically, Justice Douglas grew up in Washington state.
