Legal Issues

WA Passes Gun Control, Murders Rise gun control red t-shirt

Reporting on a “troubling” trend in random murders involving homeless people in Seattle and King County, Washington, a Seattle Times story had the unintentional consequence of revealing how homicides in the county that overwhelmingly supported a pair of restrictive gun control initiatives have actually gone up since the measures were passed.

Police Line tape in front of a Walmart parking lot after murders
Despite passage of two restrictive gun control measures since 2014 in Washington State, murders are up in the state’s most populated city and county.

Whether anyone will ask backers of Initiatives 594 (in 2014) and 1639 (in 2018) about this topic when they gather for a rally this Saturday at Seattle City Hall about this remains to be seen. But thanks to the newspaper, which backed both gun control measures, the homicide data is there for all to see.

According to the Times, last year saw 78 slayings in King County (including Seattle’s 31), while 2017 ended with 74 homicides and 2016 produced 66 murders. Equally damning is the notation that, “But preliminary FBI data for the first half of 2018 show a 6 percent decrease in homicides in metropolitan areas from the same period in 2017 compared to The Seattle Times count that shows an overall 5 percent increase from 2017 to 2018.” There were 27 slayings in Seattle in 2017, the Times report recalled.

On top of that, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports for 2016 and 2017, there were 195 and 228 slayings, respectively, statewide. In 2016, 127 of those murders involved firearms, and in 2017—the most recent year for which complete data is available—134 of the slayings involved guns.

Not all of the Seattle/King County homicides involved firearms, but the end result is that, in the aftermath of adopting citizen initiatives that were sold to the public as “gun safety” schemes to reduce violence, more people have been killed, and regardless of the weapon used, the victims are just as dead. Perhaps a T-shirt produced by, an activist group, says it all: gun control red t-shirt
The message on this T-shirt is self-explanatory.

It took two years before there was a single prosecution for a violation of I-594, the so-called “universal background check” measure passed after a $10 million campaign in 2014. Even then, it didn’t prevent a murder, it simply prosecuted an individual for selling the firearm used in the murder without going through the obligatory background check process.

In a “Q&A” on I-594, when explaining the benefits of passing the measure, proponents asserted, “There is abundant evidence that background checks reduce crime and save lives.” That is hardly what the Seattle/King County data demonstrates, and where crime reduction is concerned, that’s a question best posed to the owners of Fred’s Gun in Sequim. Over the weekend, according to the Peninsula Daily News, somebody using an agricultural loader smashed through the gun shop wall and stole at least 20 handguns. There definitely was no background check involved, nor will there be if or when those hot guns make their way into the criminal black market.

The Seattle Times story included mentions of slayings that involved murder weapons other than guns. One man was stabbed to death, another bludgeoned. Yet, it has become almost obligatory for media reports to identify firearm-related slayings as “gun violence,” yet there is no similar demonization in fatal stabbings to identify them as “knife violence,” for example.

In Olympia this year, there was an effort to pass a restrictive training requirement for concealed pistol licenses in what appears to have been an attempt to discourage Washingtonians from applying for or renewing their CPLs. Washington has never required training to exercise a fundamental right to bear arms that is protected by both the state and federal constitutions. Evidently, lawmakers decided this was not the time to start, especially with more than 616,000 active CPLs, which translates to as many likely angry voters in 2020.

Considering the Times story, it’s not clear what adding another restriction on law-abiding Washington gun owners would have accomplished.

Do you believe new gun control laws can in any way be tied to the murders in Washington state? Share your answer and reasoning in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (17)

  1. I am sorry, but the author is either dumb or is purposefully misleading everyone… the legislation that is discussed is NOT in effect yet.. it will do so in July 2019…. so there is a very serious cause vs causation falacy here…

    Math is hard people, but the calendar shoudl be easy 🙂

  2. I have a unique idea: After taking away the guns, the next step should be to make committing crimes illegal. This way the criminals not only won’t have guns, but they won’t be able to use them anyhow. Then we can all undress; sit in a big circle; and put our hand in the lap of the person to our right. Of course if we do that people who see us all might confuse us with a democratic caucus!

    My response is to become a better shot; I would not want to be aiming at one target and hit someone else!

  3. Easy my friend! Talk is cheep. Bring it forward
    for sure, but bring it to the people who can do
    something about it. Right to bear arms.
    VOTE for the right.

  4. Yes, with these restrictions the criminals have a leg up on law-abiding citizens. These victims we’re probably being taken advantage of because they were soft targets with no way of defending themselves. My only argument is until they can take the guns out of the criminals hands and off the street they should not restrict law abiding Citizen‘s with these gun laws that promise to make the community safer when you know guns are still out on the street and that they’ll never get them off the street. Only the criminals will have the firepower and the law-abiding citizens will be left Defenseless. Remember guns don’t kill people people kill people. The next thing you’ll be banning is Everything that could be used as a weapon from work tools,knives, cars etc. etc. etc.

  5. Gun control works – because you know, you take a criminal’s gun away, ain’t no way he gonna go get another one . . .

  6. It’s sad that the American people eat up the let’s get guns out of the state or let’s restrict guns, Chicago is a great example of why restricting guns is a bad idea. How are people suppose to protect themselves? Are they supposed to wait for law enforcement? Or maybe Superman will fly in and stop the violence, security is an illusion. If people want to do harm to others they are going to do it one way or another. Maybe we should restrict some people from eating fast food, or from being able to use knives, or cars. People need to wake up and research things, and not trust a political figure to always tell the truth. As they have their own agenda, so wake up take classes about gun safety.

  7. Typos: *yet, instead of “get.” * Democrats, instead of “democrats.” * go, instead of “to.”

  8. It’s difficult given the wording of this article. However, if I read this right, according to the Times, 2016 had 66 homicides, 2017 had 77 homicides, and 2018 had 78 homicides. That is a trend that is rising. In spite of the fact that the FBI says that it’s down 6% “for the same period last year” only means that homicides are down 6% for the first quarter of the year. None of the other years reported showed when these homicides spiked or trenched, so comparatives are subjective here. That being said, criminals are stupid, but they can read. If they know that a particular area has been restricted with respect to its ability to defend itself, it might attract criminals to be more emboldened in their behavior. It might also be a contributing factor in the mind of someone emotionally or psychologically compromised to act out knowing that there is somewhat less of a chance that retaliation would match the violent level of the perpetrator. All things considered, it isn’t the weapon that should be identified as the “assault” object nor the descriptor of the “violence”. Both of these belong to the person wielding that attribute at the time. I see nothing wrong with a training requirement for anyone wanting to carry a lethal weapon. I see nothing wrong with having to qualify yearly with that weapon. I see nothing wrong with having to answer the questions on the permit application on a yearly basis at the time of that qualification. Lying on that form should be a felony that will land you in prison for a very long time with no chance to get another one. That message is clear and simple. Be responsible Don’t abuse the right.

  9. Gun control solves nothing. Gun Control removes the Law Abiding Citizens opportunities of defending themselves against criminals. At the same time Gun Control opens the door for increased crime and increased victims of crime. The criminals are probably snickering and saying out loud = Thank You Gun Control. So, how much stupid does it take to think criminals are going to obey gun laws.

  10. “The right to bear arms”. What happened to common sense?
    People kill people, and have since the beginning of time, and
    with anything available. Weapons evolved to hunt, and protect,
    against any threat, animal or human.
    If we were (by right) able to defend and protect,
    we would no longer be helpless victims.
    Changing background check requirements,
    limiting mag capacity, and restricting civilian ability to
    purchase automatic weapons is part of
    common sense. Let’s get real!

  11. “The right to bear arms”. What happened to common sense?
    People kill people, and have since the beginning of time, and
    with anything available. Weapons evolved to hunt, and protect,
    against any threat, animal or human.
    If we were (by right) able to defend and protect,
    we would no longer be helpless victims.

  12. It seems if all or most victims were legally armed that the crimes would have came to a halt. The criminals were just taking advantage of non-defended citezens due to the public knowledge of the gun restrictions knowing they would have the upper hand in the occurring crime. The banning of lawful citizen’s guns-the bad guys will have the upper hand every time.

  13. What this article does is point out the truth! Gun control does not work its been proven with hard Data that’s been collected over the years and in some instances for as long as recorded history on gun crime!
    The anti gun lobby will skew data to make their point ( Their truth ) not the truth
    they cant deal with the real truth.
    If you can answer these questions with logical answers you might want to consider your stand on gun control.
    1. Why are there back ground checks to purchase fire arms?
    a. To catch criminals or known felons attempting to purchase a fire arm.
    b. To create a nationwide gun owner data base as a prelude to confiscation?
    c. To create the illusion that our elected representatives did their jobs
    d. To keep us safe because we are helpless tax payers.
    “Gun Control is not Gun Safety”

  14. Leave it to get another State legislature and/or city council made up of gun-grabbing democrats to ignore data and pass yet more unenforceable gun laws…and then watch gun crime to up. Gee, you’d think that they were really just afraid of an armed citizenry…oh, yeah…I almost forgot: they are.

  15. While not a supporter of restrictive gun laws, I often wonder when people write of a 5% increase in gun related crime in a region, what was the population change overall. If the population went up 10% there is a net loss. If the population declined by 10% the reported 5% increase in actual cases is statistically higher by a larger percentage. Often the percentage per capita is higher.

    Gun related crime is also only a small part of the overall increase. When criminals don’t believe there is a likelihood of a person being able to stop them, crime goes up overall not just crime committed with a firearm. Home invasion being one of these, which is seen most often, especially in the inner city. When a criminal dos not fear prosecution, crime also goes up.

    I suppose now there will be new Gun Shop regulations to prevent bull dozers from being able to break into the stores. That is how most politicians think.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.