The American Firearm Association and Washington Gun Rights is urging the court to declare the new gun ban a direct violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

The American Firearm Association and Washington Gun Rights group have joined the legal battle against Washington state’s new law banning the sale of modern sport rifles.

Following the enactment of the ban, a federal suit was filed to challenge its constitutionality. The American Firearm Association and Washington Gun Rights group have recently filed a joint friend of the court brief in support of the plaintiffs, urging the court to declare the new gun ban a direct violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Local attorney D. Angus Lee represents the American Firearm Association and Washington Gun Rights. Lee emphasized, “This ban clearly violates the Constitution and disregards Supreme Court precedent. It seems that the legislature is purposefully ignoring the constitution in an irrational attempt to disarm law-abiding citizens.” Lee further questioned the government’s priorities, stating, “Considering the government’s failure to effectively address the significant increase in street crime and riots in recent years, one must question their obsession with disarming law-abiding citizens.”

In the case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Supreme Court established that the Second Amendment protects the possession and use of weapons that are “in common use,” prioritizing the right of law-abiding citizens to use arms for self-defense over other interests.

However, despite the ruling in Bruen, Washington state, along with other states, is attempting to ban what are commonly referred to as “assault weapons,” but which Lee argues should be called “modern sporting rifles” (MSRs).

Lee explains, “MSRs have been widely purchased by law-abiding citizens for self-defense, target shooting, hunting, and defense against an oppressive government. The number of MSRs in private hands exceeds the number of Ford F-Series pickups on the streets, demonstrating their prevalence. Additionally, these weapons are rarely used for criminal purposes.”

The term “assault weapon” was coined to create a more threatening image of MSRs, but it does not alter the scope of the Second Amendment. The fact that millions of Americans lawfully use these firearms proves that Washington’s ban cannot be justified under the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedents.

Lee argues in the brief that this ban directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen. The groups’ friend of the court brief asserts that the banned weapons are protected by the Second Amendment.

The argument put forward by Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, suggesting that these weapons serve no purpose other than mass murder, is unfounded. Numerous cases exist where individuals have used MSRs to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones. Moreover, many police departments equip their officers with AR-15s and other “assault weapons.”

MSRs are standard semiautomatic rifles commonly used for self-defense and other lawful activities, making them protected by the Second Amendment. Washington’s imposed ban is inconsistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation in the nation.