Let’s be perfectly honest. The Great Divide between the two gun initiatives — I-594 and I-591 — will never see a bridge built. Both factions are obstinate and emotional. Extreme politics are becoming more visible as we get closer to Nov. 4.

Here’s a look at what the two initiatives are and what the major arguments are, both for and against them. If you haven’t already, it’s time to decide how to vote.

I-594

What you’ll see on the November ballot:

Initiative Measure No. 594 concerns background checks for firearm sales and transfers. This measure would apply currently used criminal and public safety background checks by licensed dealers to all firearm sales and transfers, including gun show and online sales, with specific exceptions.

Should this measure be enacted into law?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

If you vote “Yes” and I-594 is approved, this would mean that whenever and however a gun is sold, a background check would first be run on the prospective buyer. This broadens already existing law to include purchasing between individuals, at gun shows and online. I-594 closes those loopholes.

Goal: I-594 would help provide greater public safety for Washingtonians by making it more difficult for criminals, the seriously mentally ill, and domestic abusers to obtain a lethal weapon. Current law is that criminal and public safety background checks are run only by licensed gun dealers, under federal law.

“Exceptions” include transfers of antique guns or to immediate family — and temporary loans for self-defense, hunting, sporting events and competitions.

“Transfer” includes trade or barter. “Person” is defined as an individual, corporation, club, association, or other legal entity, per Common Sense Information Media.

Arguments against I-594: Criminals will continue to break the law to obtain guns. Background checks burden law-abiding gun owners and invade their privacy rights. Excessive regulations will cause law abiding citizens to unintentionally commit crimes. Law enforcement officers are already too busy to take on this work, and there are no funds for enforcement resources. The initiative uses confusing words that can be turned against gun owners, present or future.

I-591

What you’ll see on the November ballot:

This measure would prohibit government agencies from confiscating guns or other firearms from citizens without due process, or from requiring background checks on firearm recipients unless a uniform national standard is required.

Should this measure be enacted into law?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

If you vote “Yes” and I-591 is approved there will be no changes to existing state or federal gun laws.

Goal, part 1: No confiscation without due process. Passing this would be a reminder to state and federal government to keep their hands off our citizens’ weapons.

Goal, part 2: No background checks beyond those of uniform federal requirements. Washington gun laws should be the same as any other state’s gun laws. This protects gun owners’ privacy by keeping their purchases of guns from private individuals, gun shows or online out of a registry and permanent records of ownership. Background checks are burdensome.

Arguments against I-591, part 1: This is unnecessary. The right to bear arms and to due process are already protected by the Constitution.

Arguments against I-591, part 2: Passing this would continue to make it easy for dangerous people to get their hands on lethal weapons. 591 tries to lock us into federal standard with a do-nothing Congress unwilling to act. As we patiently teach our children, with all rights come responsibilities. Americans have a right to safety. Background checks work.

A federal background check has existed since the Brady Act of 1993. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, a total of six states, plus Washington, D.C., have voted for the same thing that I-591 does not want us to have — universal background checks on all sales and transfers of all firearms. Other states have also voted for background check laws that improves on the federal standard.

I-591’s second part directly conflicts with I-594 and could cancel it out should both I-594 and I-591 be approved.

Again, there is no middle ground with these two initiatives. It could be that if both should win a majority of votes needed to pass, that the battle could continue on to the state Supreme Court. America is watching what happens here in Washington.

— Marylin Olds is an opinion columnist. Comments are welcome at marylin.olds@gmail.com.