Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Kitsap County Code, in violation of RCW 9.41.290

  1. #1
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763

    Kitsap County Code, in violation of RCW 9.41.290

    So I was taking a look at Kitsap County's Code, would you take a look at this...

    (note, I know this is not Kitsap County's official website, however if you go to kitsap county's website and click on the link for the county code it takes you to this page)

    this is KCC Title 10.24.060

    10.24.060 General regulations.
    (a) No person shall carry a pistol in any vehicle unless it is unloaded or carry a pistol concealed on his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a license therefor as provided for in RCW 9.41.

    (b) No person shall deliver a pistol to any person under the age of twenty-one or to one who he has reasonable cause to believe has been convicted of a crime of violence, or is a drug addict, an habitual drunkard, or of unsound mind.

    (c) No person shall change, alter, remove or obliterate the name of the maker, model, manufacturer’s number, or other mark of identification on any pistol. Possession of any pistol upon which any such mark has been changed, altered, removed or obliterated, shall be prima facie evidence that the possessor has changed, altered, removed, or obliterated the same. This shall not apply to replacement barrels in old revolvers, which barrels are produced by current manufacturers and therefore do not have the marking on the barrels of the original manufacturers who are no longer in business.
    Note, section A)

    only allows conceal carry or vehicle carry with a permit. it doesn't mention that in many cases a permit is not required, as outlined in RCW 9.41.060, for instance, the hunting and fishing exception (which actually applies to any outdoor recreational activity) and the firearm dealer exemption and the carrying a concealed unloaded pistol in a closed case or wrapper.

    Section B) State law only restricts firearm purchase to age 18 and not 21

    Section C, almost had me, it seems to follow RCW 9.41.140 verbatim, except, it uses "pistol" and then says a "barrel on an old revolver"

    but 9.41.140 states

    No person may change, alter, remove, or obliterate the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's number, or other mark of identification on any firearm. Possession of any firearm upon which any such mark shall have been changed, altered, removed, or obliterated, shall be prima facie evidence that the possessor has changed, altered, removed, or obliterated the same. This section shall not apply to replacement barrels in old firearms, which barrels are produced by current manufacturers and therefor do not have the markings on the barrels of the original manufacturers who are no longer in business. This section also shall not apply if the changes do not make the firearm illegal for the person to possess under state or federal law.
    therefore, since a prosecution is theoretically allowed by this code if carrying any pistol other then a revolver with a replaced barrel made by an obsolete manufacturer, it is more restrictive then state law and thus void,

    RCW 9.41.290 states

    The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
    but wait! that's not all! Just for the repeat county government offender, they qualify for the Bonus Round!

    look at KCC 10.24.020
    10.24.020 Conviction for display or possession.
    (a) No person shall display, sell, give away, purchase or possess any snap-blade knife, or tear gas pen or projector.
    how about RCW 9.91.160
    (2) No town, city, county, special purpose district, quasi-municipal corporation or other unit of government may prohibit a person eighteen years old or older, or a person fourteen years old or older who has the permission of a parent or guardian to do so, from purchasing or possessing a personal protection spray device or from using such a device in a manner consistent with the authorized use of force under RCW 9A.16.020. No town, city, county, special purpose district, quasi-municipal corporation, or other unit of government may prohibit a person eighteen years old or older from delivering a personal protection spray device to a person authorized to possess such a device.


    Think I should give my local county commissioner a ring on monday?
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 05-18-2013 at 12:56 AM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  2. #2
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post



    Think I should give my local county commissioner a ring on monday?
    You should give them a call, if you gave them a ring they might take it the wrong way.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  3. #3
    Regular Member leitung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Port Orchard, Washington, USA
    Posts
    151
    Interesting, so under Kitsap County code, changing a Glock barrel with one with a different serial number is illegal I take it?

    I mean it holds no weight under state law, but interesting none the less.

    Looking forward to their input on this.

  4. #4
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by leitung View Post
    Interesting, so under Kitsap County code, changing a Glock barrel with one with a different serial number is illegal I take it?

    I mean it holds no weight under state law, but interesting none the less.

    Looking forward to their input on this.
    not really, I think it only applies to altering or defacing a serial number, some firearms made before the 1968 gun control act did not have serial numbers at all and some had the serial on the barrel and not the reciever.

    so if you replaced a barrel with a new one the gun would have no serial.... this applies only to obsolete guns made prior to 68 though...

    in a Glock the serial that matters is the one in that steel plate on the underside of the frame. that's the number required. everything else is just extra.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    The only currently manufactured gun that I know of, that has the serial number on the barrel, is the Ruger semi auto 22 pistol. On that gun, the barrel is considered the receiver.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Port Orchard, Washington, USA
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    The only currently manufactured gun that I know of, that has the serial number on the barrel, is the Ruger semi auto 22 pistol. On that gun, the barrel is considered the receiver.
    This. Most modern pistols have only the caliber listed on the barrel. Very old revolvers, like the break top revolvers of the late 1800s early 1900s often had a SN on the barrel, cylinder, frame and inside of the grips as well as some of the internal parts. Part of the reason behind that was that firearms were very much hand fitted and you didn't want to mix parts at the factory during the final inspection period.

    Section A mentions state law.

  7. #7
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by sirpuma View Post
    This. Most modern pistols have only the caliber listed on the barrel. Very old revolvers, like the break top revolvers of the late 1800s early 1900s often had a SN on the barrel, cylinder, frame and inside of the grips as well as some of the internal parts. Part of the reason behind that was that firearms were very much hand fitted and you didn't want to mix parts at the factory during the final inspection period.

    Section A mentions state law.
    it mentions state law, but is incorrect in application.

    it says "without a license therefore provided for in RCW 9.41." does that mean license as in permission granted by the state to carry a firearm in general? or a license as in a concealed pistol license?
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 05-18-2013 at 02:12 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  8. #8
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    If you see a posting "all SN's match", that would probably include the barrel. all of my CZ's have sn's on the barrel that match the frame and the slide, except my CZ52 which has a custom barrel that I installed. My old Colt has the SN three places also, including the barrel.

    However, there was no requirement to have any SN, anywhere, prior to 1968, and after 1968 the only requirement is the receiver.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    not really, I think it only applies to altering or defacing a serial number, some firearms made before the 1968 gun control act did not have serial numbers at all and some had the serial on the barrel and not the reciever.

    so if you replaced a barrel with a new one the gun would have no serial.... this applies only to obsolete guns made prior to 68 though...

    in a Glock the serial that matters is the one in that steel plate on the underside of the frame. that's the number required. everything else is just extra.
    Home made firearms do not have serial numbers they are not required to.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  10. #10
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Home made firearms do not have serial numbers they are not required to.
    everyone here is missing the point!

    the point is not where or what when or how a SN is required!

    it's that Kitsap County has no authority to enact the ordinance!
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Port Orchard, Washington, USA
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    it mentions state law, but is incorrect in application.

    it says "without a license therefore provided for in RCW 9.41." does that mean license as in permission granted by the state to carry a firearm in general? or a license as in a concealed pistol license?
    Section A talks says you can't carry concealed or loaded in a vehicle without a license and has the exception of abode and fixed place of business. So section A is in line with state law.

    Section B is not in line with state law as state law has a less restrictive description for age.

    Section C is somewhat inline with state law but is poorly written and they have a poor understanding of firearm parts. The point is that it makes it illegal to be in possession of a firearm with altered manufacturer info on the firearm. The frame is the firearm, period. If the firearm is home made then no SN is required and therefore you can't be in violation of the law because not have an SN doesn't mean the manufacturers SN is obliterated or altered. The person who made it simply didn't put one on. The "this shall not apply to" statement doesn't belong as it doesn't accurately depict how the SN is affected. Also the only part of the manufacturers info that is important enough that it can't be altered is the SN. ATF doesn't give a crap about the rest.

    Oh, and Glock has the SN on the barrels, slide and frame.
    Last edited by sirpuma; 05-20-2013 at 02:11 AM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    BUT, BUT, BUT, a Glock really isn't a gun....(Sarcasm)

  13. #13
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Trigger Dr View Post
    BUT, BUT, BUT, a Glock really isn't a gun....(Sarcasm)
    Funny!

  14. #14
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990
    Glock, kinda like Pluto. Both not real.
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  15. #15
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    it mentions state law, but is incorrect in application.

    it says "without a license therefore provided for in RCW 9.41." does that mean license as in permission granted by the state to carry a firearm in general? or a license as in a concealed pistol license?
    9.41 has no provisions for "general" licenses to carry a firearm. As such, the law presumes cpl.
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    9.41 has no provisions for "general" licenses to carry a firearm. As such, the law presumes cpl.
    I believe it's only regarding concealed carry, not open.

    10.24.060 General regulations.
    (a) No person shall carry a pistol in any vehicle unless it is unloaded or carry a pistol concealed on his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a license therefor as provided for in RCW 9.41.
    A poorly written code. After the "or" part that pretty much copies part of the RCW, and the code assumes there's some part in RCW 9.41. that covers CPLs. The other issue is they omit exemptions, which creates an code stricter than state law. Unless we just have the edited version posted above.

    I don't see why they just didn't say "Concealed handgun possession is restricted as stated in RCW 9.41.050 and 9.41.300." Or something like that.

    Jack Sparrow: "I thought you were supposed to keep to the Code."
    Mr. Gibbs: "We figured they were more actual guidelines."

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    [QUOTE=mikeyb;1941783]I believe it's only regarding concealed carry, not open.

    No you only need a license to carry concealed, you can carry open without a license.





    I don't see why they just didn't say "Concealed handgun possession is restricted as stated in RCW 9.41.050 and 9.41.300." Or something like that.

    If it said that then you would only be able to carry concealed, 300 says "Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070" they do not address how the pistol is carried only that if a person has a pistol in a restricted area they must have a CPL.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    [QUOTE=Jeff Hayes;1941789]
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeyb View Post

    No you only need a license to carry concealed, you can carry open without a license.


    If it said that then you would only be able to carry concealed, 300 says "Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070" they do not address how the pistol is carried only that if a person has a pistol in a restricted area they must have a CPL.
    What I'm saying is the KCC only addresses concealed carry in section A. They took the "highlights" of the RCW and ignored the exemptions. Had they just said that KC follows the appropriate RCW in regards to concealed carry, they would be fine. KC should have expressly mentioned the proper RCW for concealed permits, not just the general 9.41.

    Open carry is not in dispute here, just concealed carry.

  19. #19
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeyb View Post
    I believe it's only regarding concealed carry, not open.



    A poorly written code. After the "or" part that pretty much copies part of the RCW, and the code assumes there's some part in RCW 9.41. that covers CPLs. The other issue is they omit exemptions, which creates an code stricter than state law. Unless we just have the edited version posted above.

    I don't see why they just didn't say "Concealed handgun possession is restricted as stated in RCW 9.41.050 and 9.41.300." Or something like that.

    Jack Sparrow: "I thought you were supposed to keep to the Code."
    Mr. Gibbs: "We figured they were more actual guidelines."
    actually they do have a list of exemptions in county code that I didn't include, similar to .060, but worded poorly to where it is still stricter then state law.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •