“Approval of I591 automatically removes the potential obstacle of Washington State voters and/or legislature approving legislative measures to nullify a future Federal background check law...”
It does no such thing. How could it? Absolutely nothing in the wording says anything about forcing the state to follow new federal laws, the wording simply states that it’s unlawful for the state to adopt background checks unless required to by federal law.
Nothing in the initiative would force our congressmen or senators to vote in favor of national background checks. Nothing in the initiative would prevent a voter initiative that sought to invalidate federal law.
You’re making crap up. 591 protects gun rights, period. It doesn’t make it easier to pass federal gun control, period. Nothing in 591 prevents voters from trying a marijuana gambit around federal gun laws.
Stop lying!
“the wording simply states that it’s unlawful for the state to adopt background checks unless required to by federal law.”
If you didn’t want the state law enforcement agencies to adopt background checks, then why do you specifically authorize them to do so on behalf of the Federal Government? There is already a centuries old traditional means for doing so with the Federal Government conducting background investigations as needed through the U.S. Marshall and/or the County Sheriff. using existing means permits a State and its citizens to exercise the power to nullify unconstitutional Federal laws, as part of the Constitutional separation of powers.
“Nothing in the initiative would prevent a voter initiative that sought to invalidate federal law.”
Nothing I wrote said I591 would “prevent a voter initiative....” What I did say is that I591 would need to be repealed to withdraw its permission for the State of Washington to conduct background checks for the Federal Government, and thereby make one more serious impediment to getting such legislation passed in the Washington State legislature in addition to a nullification of the Federal law infringing upon the Second Amendment.