• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

What happens if WA takes longer than 30 days to issue your CPL?

theaero

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
116
Location
Bellevue, WA
Happened to a buddy of mine in Spokane. Took about 48 days before they finally coughed it up. According to state law, this doesn't seem legal. But if there are no repercussions, what is to stop them from doing it more often?
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
Happened to a buddy of mine in Spokane. Took about 48 days before they finally coughed it up. According to state law, this doesn't seem legal. But if there are no repercussions, what is to stop them from doing it more often?

according to RCW 9.41.810 it is a misdemeaner, and at least in theory whoever was responsible (the sheriff?) could be charged in a court of law. So now how to get the responsible person charged? Well, I think that is part of the problem.



RCW 9.41.810

Penalty.

Any violation of any provision of this chapter, except as otherwise provided, shall be a misdemeanor and punishable accordingly
 
Last edited:

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
according to RCW 9.41.810 it is a misdemeaner, and at least in theory whoever was responsible (the sheriff?) could be charged in a court of law. So now how to get the responsible person charged? Well, I think that is part of the problem.
RCW 9.41.810
Penalty.
Any violation of any provision of this chapter, except as otherwise provided, shall be a misdemeanor and punishable accordingly

Then there is this

RCW 9.41.0975
Officials and agencies — Immunity, writ of mandamus.
(1) The state, local governmental entities, any public or private agency, and the employees of any state or local governmental entity or public or private agency, acting in good faith, are immune from liability:
(d) For failing to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person eligible for such a license;
 

Right Wing Wacko

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
645
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
according to RCW 9.41.810 it is a misdemeaner, and at least in theory whoever was responsible (the sheriff?) could be charged in a court of law. So now how to get the responsible person charged? Well, I think that is part of the problem.



RCW 9.41.810

Penalty.

Any violation of any provision of this chapter, except as otherwise provided, shall be a misdemeanor and punishable accordingly

Unfortunatly, the legislature created a loophole for them...

RCW 9.41.0975

Officials and agencies — Immunity, writ of mandamus.

(1) The state, local governmental entities, any public or private agency, and the employees of any state or local governmental entity or public or private agency, acting in good faith, are immune from liability:

(a) For failure to prevent the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person whose receipt or possession of the firearm is unlawful;

(b) For preventing the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person who may lawfully receive or possess a firearm;

(c) For issuing a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person ineligible for such a license;

(d) For failing to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person eligible for such a license;

(e) For revoking or failing to revoke an issued concealed pistol license or alien firearm license;

(f) For errors in preparing or transmitting information as part of determining a person's eligibility to receive or possess a firearm, or eligibility for a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license;

(g) For issuing a dealer's license to a person ineligible for such a license; or

(h) For failing to issue a dealer's license to a person eligible for such a license.

(2) An application may be made to a court of competent jurisdiction for a writ of mandamus:

(a) Directing an issuing agency to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license wrongfully refused;

(b) Directing a law enforcement agency to approve an application to purchase wrongfully denied;

(c) Directing that erroneous information resulting either in the wrongful refusal to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license or in the wrongful denial of a purchase application be corrected; or

(d) Directing a law enforcement agency to approve a dealer's license wrongfully denied.

The application for the writ may be made in the county in which the application for a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license or to purchase a pistol was made, or in Thurston county, at the discretion of the petitioner. A court shall provide an expedited hearing for an application brought under this subsection (2) for a writ of mandamus. A person granted a writ of mandamus under this subsection (2) shall be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.
 

OlGutshotWilly

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
443
Location
Snohomish, WA, ,
couple little words in there..."...when acting in good faith...". It is not a blanket immunity. If there is no reasonable reason for their delay, or refusal, they just lost their immunity. Ya think?

This is what I was just considering as well. Is it incumbent upon me to prove that they are not acting in good faith, or do they have to prove that they are, in fact, acting in good faith? Once again it seems, we are expected to conform to and obey the laws, but our Government gets a free pass.

My 30 days are up tomorrow from my renewal application, monday is a holiday, so we will see what I get in the mail on Tuesday. I won't be making this mistake again.
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
couple little words in there..."...when acting in good faith...". It is not a blanket immunity. If there is no reasonable reason for their delay, or refusal, they just lost their immunity. Ya think?

Find a prosecutor or someone willing to go forward with getting it infront of a Judge and then to prove it was not in good faith and have a Judge rule on it as such, Really! Ya Think?
 

Coyote_VS_ACME

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
37
Location
Bummertown
While a bother, I cannot help but think in the back of my mind, that automatically going after the Sheriff for slow processing of it and outright off the cuff thinking it was on purpose is harmful.

It seems that for now, more times than not, folks like the Sheriff and LEO's support and understand our position and will work with us.

Going after one that might be acting in good faith but bogged down by say, sheer numbers of applications / renewals honestly - well, I think that if it hurts or has a chance to hurt a good working relationship then will they be so supportive in the future after getting mired in a legal battle?

We need supportive folks in "high" places all we can get.
 

Flopsweat

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
165
Location
Slightly right of center
While a bother, I cannot help but think in the back of my mind, that automatically going after the Sheriff for slow processing of it and outright off the cuff thinking it was on purpose is harmful.

It seems that for now, more times than not, folks like the Sheriff and LEO's support and understand our position and will work with us.

Going after one that might be acting in good faith but bogged down by say, sheer numbers of applications / renewals honestly - well, I think that if it hurts or has a chance to hurt a good working relationship then will they be so supportive in the future after getting mired in a legal battle?

We need supportive folks in "high" places all we can get.

Well said. Better to go after those jurisdictions that call the 30 days a "waiting period" (it's not) and then slip over it. In the case of the "honest" (yeah, I said that) ones who are just swamped, maybe a gentle reminder that it is against state law to go over the 30 days and ask how we can help.
 

Difdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
987
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
I'd bet that if it's simply a case of backlog, too many applications to be processed by too few people, none of those people would be vulnerable to a claim of bad faith. Whoever is in charge of hiring enough people to handle the work load might be, but if they have a fixed budget they are not in control of, that might be a problem too. And whoever decides on departmental budgets might be too insulated from the problem to be even aware of it, which eliminates bad faith as well.

Corporation: An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. --Ambrose Bierce

Bierce was talking about corporations, but any bureaucracy does that, public or private. And the CPL issue is a perfect example.
 
Last edited:

Raffie

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
75
Location
Lynnwood
Thought I saw somewhere it was taking 60-90 day to get a CPL due to the amount of people applying.

Only 2 things will happen.
#1 You will get your CPL.
#2 You will get a letter saying why.

Nothing more.
 

LarryM

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
76
Location
Spokane, WA
35 days today for me in Spokane...called once couple of weeks ago but I'm not going to bother them again - no sense in rocking the boat, so to speak....:cool:
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
I'd bet that if it's simply a case of backlog, too many applications to be processed by too few people, none of those people would be vulnerable to a claim of bad faith. Whoever is in charge of hiring enough people to handle the work load might be, but if they have a fixed budget they are not in control of, that might be a problem too. And whoever decides on departmental budgets might be too insulated from the problem to be even aware of it, which eliminates bad faith as well.



Bierce was talking about corporations, but any bureaucracy does that, public or private. And the CPL issue is a perfect example.


That's all fine and good but the LAW still says "Shall issue within 30 Days". Nowhere does it say "unless your incompetent and understaffed".

The law does provide for cancelling a permit issued if adverse information is revealed.

Again, the purpose of the law was to prevent stalling tactics and who knows if that's the case here or not.
 

bmg50cal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
306
Location
WA - North Whidbey/ Deception Pass
There is that significantly under utilized section 10 of RCW 9.41.070, they could easily make people happy while they piddle around issuing the 5 year license.
(10) Notwithstanding the requirements of subsections (1) through (9) of this section, the chief of police of the municipality or the sheriff of the county of the applicant's residence may issue a temporary emergency license for good cause pending review under subsection (1) of this section. However, a temporary emergency license issued under this subsection shall not exempt the holder of the license from any records check requirement. Temporary emergency licenses shall be easily distinguishable from regular licenses.
 
Last edited:

LarryM

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
76
Location
Spokane, WA
Nothing yet....37 days and counting - guess I'll JUST have to be satisfied with OC for the time being! LOL
 

LarryM

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
76
Location
Spokane, WA
Unfortunatly, the legislature created a loophole for them...

RCW 9.41.0975

Officials and agencies — Immunity, writ of mandamus.

(1) The state, local governmental entities, any public or private agency, and the employees of any state or local governmental entity or public or private agency, acting in good faith, are immune from liability:

(a) For failure to prevent the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person whose receipt or possession of the firearm is unlawful;

(b) For preventing the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person who may lawfully receive or possess a firearm;

(c) For issuing a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person ineligible for such a license;

(d) For failing to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license to a person eligible for such a license;

(e) For revoking or failing to revoke an issued concealed pistol license or alien firearm license;

(f) For errors in preparing or transmitting information as part of determining a person's eligibility to receive or possess a firearm, or eligibility for a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license;

(g) For issuing a dealer's license to a person ineligible for such a license; or

(h) For failing to issue a dealer's license to a person eligible for such a license.

(2) An application may be made to a court of competent jurisdiction for a writ of mandamus:

(a) Directing an issuing agency to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license wrongfully refused;

(b) Directing a law enforcement agency to approve an application to purchase wrongfully denied;

(c) Directing that erroneous information resulting either in the wrongful refusal to issue a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license or in the wrongful denial of a purchase application be corrected; or

(d) Directing a law enforcement agency to approve a dealer's license wrongfully denied.

The application for the writ may be made in the county in which the application for a concealed pistol license or alien firearm license or to purchase a pistol was made, or in Thurston county, at the discretion of the petitioner. A court shall provide an expedited hearing for an application brought under this subsection (2) for a writ of mandamus. A person granted a writ of mandamus under this subsection (2) shall be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

Makes you wonder why they wasted their time creating a law in the first place! (Oh, but we are talking about Olympia, aren't we?????)
 

1sgDavo

New member
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
7
Location
Ritzville, Washington, United States
spokane

Right now it is taking 60 to 90 days for CPL in Spokane, my sister and brother in law are waiting for theirs and this is what they were told, I think it is a crock and a stalling tactic hoping others will forget about getting theirs. It really does not take that long to run the NCIC. :mad:
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
Right now it is taking 60 to 90 days for CPL in Spokane, my sister and brother in law are waiting for theirs and this is what they were told, I think it is a crock and a stalling tactic hoping others will forget about getting theirs. It really does not take that long to run the NCIC. :mad:

I would suggest those are facing this issue to contact their State Representatives.

Find Your Representative Here
 
Top