WA permit-to-purchase bill is a must for public safety, not a risk

Over the past decade, the rate of firearm homicide in Washington has doubled. Similarly, firearm suicide rates are at near-record highs. A growing body of research points to a tangible solution: permit-to-purchase laws save lives.

Critics of House Bill 1163, which has passed both the state House and Senate, claim permit-to-purchase laws will not keep guns away from criminals. What they do not mention is that these laws are associated with decreased gun trafficking, lower rates of firearm homicide, including fatal mass shootings, lower rates of firearm suicide, and fewer civilians being shot by law enforcement.  

I was born and raised in Washington. I graduated with a bachelor of science degree from Central Washington University. I am now an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and a gun policy researcher. I also personally own more than a half-dozen guns and have Maryland’s version of a permit-to-purchase. As a gun owner, I can tell you that getting a permit was a minor inconvenience. As a researcher, I can also tell you that a permit-to-purchase law is the most effective policy to reduce multiple forms of violence.  

Permit-to-purchase laws work by ensuring all prospective gun buyers can legally buy guns by completing a more rigorous, fingerprint-based background check and safety training. There is also a built-in waiting period while the application is processed that can prevent impulsive firearm purchases that could be used to harm oneself or others. 

Critics raise concerns about cost, arguing that requiring live-fire training could put firearms out of reach for lower-income residents. Yet, we require driver’s licenses, which involve driver’s education, testing, and fees, without claiming they infringe on the right to travel freely. The fundamental question is not whether there is a cost but whether the cost is reasonable given the immense public safety benefits. Compared to the social and economic toll of gun violence — which we know costs Washington state an estimated $10.5 billion annually — the cost of a permit-to-purchase system would be a small and justifiable investment in community safety. 

Some go so far as to suggest that permit costs might have an unintended consequence — pushing people to obtain firearms illegally, but this argument is flawed. In reality, current weak regulations allow traffickers to exploit gaps in the system. Research is clear that permit-to-purchase policies do the opposite. These policies make it harder to obtain guns illegally, which lowers rates of gun trafficking and straw purchases. In states with similar policies in place, studies show fewer guns used in crimes. Strengthening purchase requirements will make it harder, not easier, for firearms to end up in the hands of dangerous individuals. 

In addition to being effective, permit-to-purchase laws enjoy broad support. These policies are supported by more than 72% of U.S. adults, including 64% of gun owners. Among gun owners who live in states with these laws already in place, presumably having direct experience with these systems, support increases to 75%.  

As a born-and-raised Washingtonian, I’m proud that my home state has proven itself as a leader in enacting strong, evidence-based firearm policies, and HB 1163 continues that tradition. The bottom line is simple: if we are serious about reducing gun violence, we must embrace proven public health solutions. Permit-to-purchase laws are already working in states across the country. Washington lawmakers should join this growing list of states in implementing HB 1163 to make the state a safer place for all.