slapmonkay
Campaign Veteran
Ill write up a draft and send it over.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Motorcycles
- Thread starter sirpuma
- Start date
Ill write up a draft and send it over.
hermannr
Regular Member
It may be useful to think about how RCW 77 is written as concerns carry of a loaded long gun...it specifically states "...in or on..."
RCW 9.41 only says "in"???? Eh?
RCW 9.41 only says "in"???? Eh?
Last edited:
slapmonkay
Campaign Veteran
I was going to include that in my draft but I found it actually says something of the sort of: in any vehicle or upon any off road vehicle
While it is still related, it seems to not directly relate as well as I wanted. I would hope this is one of the things the AG would look for. As such, I left it out.
Here is my draft of what I would send. Short, Sweet, To the point.
Document [PDF]
Last edited:
This leads me to ask a similar question. How visable does a gun need to be to not be "concealed?" I often wear a jacket that covers some of my revolver's grip but some of the frame and the holster is visable. I have a holster I wear on occasions that's an old military style that has a large flap that covers almost the entire side arm with just the butt sticking out.
This is somewhat on topic with this thread because both conditions exist due to my motorcycle riding. I'm not overly concered about myself being in trouble as I keep my CPL with me but it would be nice to know.
This is somewhat on topic with this thread because both conditions exist due to my motorcycle riding. I'm not overly concered about myself being in trouble as I keep my CPL with me but it would be nice to know.
BigDave
Opt-Out Members
Levi I do not think you will find a definitive answer on how much is concealed but my guess would be if it can be recognized as a handgun it is not concealed.
Vitaeus
Regular Member
I agree with BigDave, there is no definition of "concealed" in the RCW's, i would expect that the old style holster would not be considered concealed. The other part of the equation is that WA CPL is shall issue and costs just $55 and removes some silly restrictions and allows you to avoid the load/unload in regards to vehicles and GFSZ issues, which is worth it in my opinion.
Bill Starks
State Researcher
EMNofSeattle
Regular Member
The answer is simple (complicated) since there is no specific defintion of conealed then we'd have to assume this goes to the "reasonable person" standard for what qualifies, which basically means it's up to any police officer who may cite and/or arrest you for such an offense, and then the reasonable prosecutor as to whether your weapon was concealed and file charges. and then the reasonable judge who will hear your case.
The jacket covering the grip of the pistol, IMHO you'll probably get jacked up on that if a cop encounters you and you have no CPL. the old style military flap holster? if completely uncovered then your flap holster will probably be ok becuase any reasonable person should be able to infer that holster is for a pistol. however I am not a cop or a lawyer so take that for what you will.
sirpuma
Regular Member
However RCW 77 deals with Long Guns, not hand guns. You can have a loaded hand gun in a vehicle, but not a loaded long gun.
amlevin
Regular Member
Can't give specific cites but if my memory serves correctly, several times this has been brought up in court cases and the outcome has been "as long as a reasonable person can discern that the object carried is a firearm it is not considered concealed". To me this could mean a Flap Style holster that covers all but the butt of the firearm, still is discernible as a firearm to that "reasonable person". IWB holsters are another subject of discussion. As long as you can tell it's a firearm, and not covered by a garment it's openly carried.
I agree that getting a CPL removes a lot of silly restrictions but there are those who are opposed them as they feel they're akin to "asking permission".
Frankly, I would like to see it something that can just be an endorsement on your drivers license. Just like the "enhanced" licenses issued now for easy border crossing in/out of Canada, just go through the same rigmarole with the questionnaire and fingerprints. One document for when you need it and takes less room in your wallet.
Grim_Night
Regular Member
+1 to this!
Bill Starks
State Researcher
The reply didn't take long...
Good Morning Bill,
After searching the laws as to the definition of a vehicle it appears both a bicycle and motorcycle meet the definition as outlined under RCW 46.04.670. Any persons transporting a firearm by means of these vehicles would be required to abide by RCW 9.41.050 2(a). If you are leaving the firearm at the vehicle, you would need to have a way to lock the firearm ‘inside’ the vehicle. A lot of bikes have saddle bags and most of them have the ability to be locked. If someone is wanting to leave their firearm in/at their bicycle or motorcycle while they are away they would need to have some kind of device/attachment that would allow the firearm to be locked inside and the firearm be concealed from view.
Good Morning Bill,
After searching the laws as to the definition of a vehicle it appears both a bicycle and motorcycle meet the definition as outlined under RCW 46.04.670. Any persons transporting a firearm by means of these vehicles would be required to abide by RCW 9.41.050 2(a). If you are leaving the firearm at the vehicle, you would need to have a way to lock the firearm ‘inside’ the vehicle. A lot of bikes have saddle bags and most of them have the ability to be locked. If someone is wanting to leave their firearm in/at their bicycle or motorcycle while they are away they would need to have some kind of device/attachment that would allow the firearm to be locked inside and the firearm be concealed from view.
slapmonkay
Campaign Veteran
Interesting... It seems the question was to vague as this reply does not really apply to carry on the vehicle but rather other items within 9.41.050(2) in regards to securing the firearm when away from vehicle.
tombrewster421
Regular Member
Wouldn't a bicycle automatically fall under the .060 exception since its an outdoor recreational activity? I'd like to see an officer cite someone for loaded OC on a bicycle. Then get their a$5 handed to them.
rapgood
Regular Member
Whether the RCWs define "concealed" is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether "concealed" is defined in RCW 9.41. It isn't.
In the absence of a statutory definition, the words used are given their ordinary and usual meaning. State v. Forrester, 21 Wn. App. 855, 861, 587 P.2d 179 (1978). The ordinary meaning of "conceal" is "to hide, secrete, or withhold from the knowledge of others." Black's Law Dictionary 288 (6th ed. 1990) ; Oxford Encyclopedic Dictionary 298 (1995).
The test of whether something is "concealed" is not the "reasonable person" test. Rather, it is a fact that must be determined by a jury. So, whether something is "concealed" is something to be determined from case-to-case, and cannot be determined as a matter of law by a judge.
Similarly, whether someone is "in" or "on" a motorcycle is fact specific. Depending on the style of the "motorcycle," one may be either "in" it or "on" it. This is particularly true since RCW 46.04.330 specifically addresses the issue.
Oh, yeah. I searched the specific question and there is no Washington case law that addresses the question.
In the absence of a statutory definition, the words used are given their ordinary and usual meaning. State v. Forrester, 21 Wn. App. 855, 861, 587 P.2d 179 (1978). The ordinary meaning of "conceal" is "to hide, secrete, or withhold from the knowledge of others." Black's Law Dictionary 288 (6th ed. 1990) ; Oxford Encyclopedic Dictionary 298 (1995).
The test of whether something is "concealed" is not the "reasonable person" test. Rather, it is a fact that must be determined by a jury. So, whether something is "concealed" is something to be determined from case-to-case, and cannot be determined as a matter of law by a judge.
Similarly, whether someone is "in" or "on" a motorcycle is fact specific. Depending on the style of the "motorcycle," one may be either "in" it or "on" it. This is particularly true since RCW 46.04.330 specifically addresses the issue.
Oh, yeah. I searched the specific question and there is no Washington case law that addresses the question.
Last edited:
xxx.jakk.xxx
Regular Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2010
- Messages
- 467
Yeah, this was my problem as well. They took from my message the wrong thing and answered it excellently. For me, it was about the firearm being concealed, whether in a vehicle or on a motorcycle and since it does require a License to conceal then it is required. For you, it's leaving it unattended.
Also, if it's so difficult to get an answer form the AG, how the hell did I actually get an answer? I'm pretty much a nobody 23 year old. I have no political ties, no contacts, etc... Why did they take the time to answer me?... I feel important, now. lol
Just so everyone can have the info, I contacted them through their online "Contact Us" link on their website
https://fortress.wa.gov/atg/formhandler/ago/ContactForm.aspx
Also, it was one of the Assistant AGs that answered my question. I really wish I hadn't deleted the response, I just thought it was so off topic that I didn't need it kept. I didn't know a response with any substance was rare. Lol
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
A response with substance is rare. I was told from their office they only handle complaints questions, from elected officials and law enforcement. Unless of course you want to complain about a business.