The New York Times editorializes on the importance of ballot measures on guns:

The vast majority of Americans — about nine in 10 — support reasonable, common-sense gun regulations. The numbers are only slightly lower among gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. And yet, year after year, lawmakers in Congress and in statehouses across the country, all beholden to the gun lobby, act as if the opposite were true.

They reject even mild, sensible laws — such as background checks and bans on gun ownership by domestic abusers or the mentally ill — that would help reduce the country’s staggering toll of gun violence.

. . .

Voters tired of being ignored on this issue are increasingly taking matters into their own hands. In Maine and Nevada, referendums on the November ballot would require background checks for all gun sales, commercial and private, with a few exceptions, such as for transfers between family members. Both states have vibrant and longstanding gun cultures, and yet pollsshow a solid majority of voters support the initiatives. The N.R.A. opposes them.

. . .

In Washington State, voters easily passed a universal background check law in 2014 after lawmakers twice refused. Now, a new ballot initiative proposes a so-called red flag law, which would allow family members or police officers to ask a court to suspend access to guns for up to a year for people demonstrated to pose a significant risk of violence to themselves or others. Three other states have such laws, including California, which passed one after a 2014 massacre in Santa Barbara by a man whose parents had warned authorities that he could be dangerous. Again, polling suggests a majority of Washington voters support the initiative. And again, the N.R.A. opposes it.

Read the full editorial here.