Home»US News»Seattle’s King County To Require Health-Warning Signs at Gun Stores

Seattle’s King County To Require Health-Warning Signs at Gun Stores

Pinterest WhatsApp

In yet another case showing that gun grabbers are never going to be happy until they take all our guns, the King County Council has decided that Initiative 1639 (I-1639) doesn’t go far enough and they’re heaping on additional gun laws. The latest measure, set to go into effect next month will require gun shops and ranges to post signs warning customers of the danger that firearms pose to one’s health.

The signs will read, “WARNING: The presence of a firearm in the home significantly increases the risk of suicide, homicide, death during domestic violence disputes and unintentional deaths to children, household members and others.” They also must meet size requirements.

If that’s not enough, firearm-related places of business must also have information on hand about suicide prevention.

These county mandates—the county includes Seattle and the greater metropolitan area—come on the coattails of voters passing I-1639, a slew of gun control measures that passed with 60 percent of the ballots, some aspects of which are being challenged in court.

Of course, the question about how to pay for implementing the warning bill’s requirements is unresolved. Seattle already has such things as taxes on guns and ammunition. You can probably count on county leaders coming up with a similarly punitive scheme to fund its latest effort to all but keep guns out of the county.

Looks like greater Seattle residents will be more vulnerable to crimes against them and their loved ones as the county’s fearless leaders pile infringements and regulations on in an effort to nullify our Second Amendment right.

King County Councilmember Joe McDermott introduced the health warning package in July, following the efforts that the government has implemented to keep people from smoking—we all know how well that has worked. But, when you play the game of follow the leader, no one says you have to follow wise precedent, right?

Article By America’s First Freedom 

Don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Previous post

University of Maine Engineering Professor Utters Stupidity: Banning Handguns Doesn't Violate 2nd Amendment If They Don't Provide Protection

Next post

Gun Control Twist: Saving One Life “Does Not Justify” Right to Carry