That yearly background check thing is ripe for challenge the first time they use it, they're going to have to prove that the denial of a background check was legitimate.To say SCOTUS overturning mag bans won't have much effect in WA is pretty silly.
Not sure everyone understands that legally 100% of existing WA "assault weapons" (ie most all semi auto rifles, PCCs, , many shotguns, etc) and threaded barrel pistols will be gone. It's not just about acquiring new ones.
All of them can leave the state, but none can enter. None of them can be handed down to grandchildren or other parties beyond just your kids. This is civilian disarmament, plain and simple. They are just taking a longer approach than Trudeau did.
Also it is currently WA law (passed 2018) that a person must go through a yearly background check in order to keep any existing guns. And the background check can be denied for any reason. Think about that for a second. They currently have the legal method to confiscate all guns in WA if they wanted to. Currently this law is unfunded but it's in the books. If they add funding, such as when the culture is more acceptable to it, it becomes an on-the-ground reality.
IMO many people in Wa are only seeing/reacting to new regs but are missing the big picture of what they are doing. Ffl regs, ammo, etc are just pieces of an all out war on gun owners and guns in WA.
The new WA regs are important but to say SCOTUS overturning mag bans nationwide won't affect WA is not very smart imo. It likely will have a critical impact on stopping WA's civilian disarmament.