• 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.

Car carry laws, regarding unloaded OC within vehicle

Difdi

Difdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
987
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
XDNick9 said:
The officer told me that i was NOT allowed to have any ammunition in the same cab as the pistol
Click to expand...

Police are to the law as an EMT is to medicine. They can handle every day issues reasonably well, they're adequate in an emergency and if they're all you've got for more serious problems, they're better than nothing. If you want in-depth information on open heart surgery (or someone to perform the operation) you're better off asking a top-notch surgeon than an EMT. If you want expert knowledge of the law, ask a lawyer or judge not a cop.
 
S

ShooterMcGavin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
208
Location
Location, Location
ShooterMcGavin said:
...A ->Is car OC only legal if the sidearm is within the carrier's holster? I suspect, but don't know if, it is NOT legal without a CPL to have the sidearm visible on the passenger seat, or visible in any other manner? What about in a holster, off the person's body (on seat, on floor...)?

B ->Does this mean that anyone traveling through WA with a sidearm (not a long-arm) can simply have it carried in an OC holster, on their person, unloaded, rather than locked in an opaque container, in the trunk, etc.? I thought states usually required unlicensed car carry to be locked away, out of reach of the occupants of the car.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Thanks for all the insight. I'm still not 100% clear :)...

A->I think the answer to the first one is NO. An unloaded pistol, as long as is visible (e.g. OC), can be anywhere within the vehicle or on-body. I don't see anything that requires the opposite.

To take (A) a step further, what about unloaded and concealed within the glove box? I cannot see how that would be illegal, from the cites I have seen here and elsewhere. So, it seems, from what I deduce, any type of unloaded carry within a vehicle is legal except concealed, on-body (again, this is without a CPL).

B->Yes. Pretty clear on that one. Without a CPL, anyone entering or traveling through WA can simply OC their empty sidearm... No resident status or other criteria needs to be met.
 
golddigger14s

golddigger14s

Activist Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,068
Location
Lawton, OK USA
How it's supposed to happen

Here is my account from South Sound report. Normally my gun would be loaded, and on my hip but I was coming home from work where I can't carry. I just got in the car, and left the gun and magazine in the glove box:
I got pulled over by a state trooper for doing 48 mph in a 35 mph zone. This was the first time getting pulled over since I became a gun owner, so I shut the car off and put my hands on the steering wheel. When he got to my door he asked if I had a handgun, I said yes in the glove box unloaded (coming from no carry work). He just said OK leave it alone, and let me have your license, proof of insurance, and registration. I gave him a heads up that I was going to the glove box to get my documents, and he was like OK do what you gotta do. Gave him all the stuff, and he went back to write my ticket. He came back, handed me my stuff and said to slow down. Sorry, no dramatic "give me your gun so I can disassemble it, strip the rounds out, and secure it for my safety" scenario.
 
Last edited:
K

kparker

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
1,326
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
An unloaded pistol, as long as is visible (e.g. OC) (emphasis added)
Click to expand...

Nope, if it's unloaded it doesn't matter whether it's visible or not. RCW 9.41.050 (2)(a) reads, "A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and... (emphasis added)" I.e. this section about handguns and vehicles contains no restrictions whatsover on unloaded handguns.
 
Vitaeus

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
kparker said:
Nope, if it's unloaded it doesn't matter whether it's visible or not. RCW 9.41.050 (2)(a) reads, "A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and... (emphasis added)" I.e. this section about handguns and vehicles contains no restrictions whatsover on unloaded handguns.
Click to expand...

you are forgetting the first part of 9.41.050, you can have an unloaded firearm in your car, EVERYWHERE, except concealed on your person. Have it in the holster, taped to your forehead, in the glove box, or even on the seat next to you( I would not recommend the last). Since the car is not your place of abode or fixed...

See other threads for the whole discussion of motor homes and "abodes", I don't remember exactly what the final determination was and the thread is waaay back on the list.

RCW 9.41.050
Carrying firearms.


(1)(a) Except in the person's place of abode or fixed place of business, a person shall not carry a pistol concealed on his or her person without a license to carry a concealed pistol.
 
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
ShooterMcGavin said:
This seems like an answer I should know, from all the studying of laws I have done around this. However, being in possession of a CPL, I have never had to face this...

From the basics:
1. OC is legal outside a vehicle.
2. Loaded OC is legal inside a vehicle, provided that the carrier has a CPL.

My question is here...
3. Unloaded OC (sidearm in holster) with a full magazine nearby is legal without a CPL.
That is what I have learned from reading a lot on this site and in WA laws, but here are where my questions arise (let's assume that I forgot my CPL at home).

A ->Is car OC only legal if the sidearm is within the carrier's holster? I suspect, but don't know if, it is NOT legal without a CPL to have the sidearm visible on the passenger seat, or visible in any other manner? What about in a holster, off the person's body (on seat, on floor...)?

B ->Does this mean that anyone traveling through WA with a sidearm (not a long-arm) can simply have it carried in an OC holster, on their person, unloaded, rather than locked in an opaque container, in the trunk, etc.? I thought states usually required unlicensed car carry to be locked away, out of reach of the occupants of the car.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I OC'd without a CPL from 1970 to 1995. I have never been in trouble with the law for any reason..so I think I know a bit about OC. I still OC, but I have a CPL now (so I can purchase without the wait)

Open Carry in a vehicle is legal unloaded without a CPL.

Open Carry in a vehicle, loaded, is legal under the several exemptions in RCW 9.41.060 without a CPL. Keep them in mind, they are very useful. (I used (8) most frequently, and was complying with (8) when my first LE "encounter" happened. It went: Deputy: "hunting"? Me: "Yep" total discussion... then the deputy muttered to himself as he left..."I see nothing illegal here" BTW: "outdoor recreational activity" is a VERY broad category.

It is not the difficult to discretely load your weapon after you exit. I carried a revolver for years, never was a problem. With a semi-auto it is much easier.

Unless you are suspected of committing a crime they cannot legally inspect your weapon anyway. It has been my experience, even when they can see the pistol (come to the passenger window as they like to do on a two lane road) it is not a problem. I have never been asked for my CPL, or my pistol, ever. (this is since my first carry (OC) in July 1970 at the Sedro Woolley Logger rodeo.
 
Last edited:
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
TheGunMan said:
I believe you cannot carry it on your person without a CPL in a vehicle. When it is in the holster while sitting in the car it is not visible enough.
Even unloaded. I know in OR it must be in the open like your dash or pass seat and not on your person period. I think that is how it is in WA.
Click to expand...

You may want to read ORS 166.250(3). It is pretty specific as to what is legal OC in OR.

As for WA, If it is in a holster on your hip you may not have the Oregon specific description, but you may carry unloaded and way you wish, or you may carry loaded in any manner you wish if you qualify for an exemption under RCW 9.41.060.
 
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
Vitaeus said:
you are forgetting the first part of 9.41.050, you can have an unloaded firearm in your car, EVERYWHERE, except concealed on your person. Have it in the holster, taped to your forehead, in the glove box, or even on the seat next to you( I would not recommend the last). Since the car is not your place of abode or fixed...

See other threads for the whole discussion of motor homes and "abodes", I don't remember exactly what the final determination was and the thread is waaay back on the list.

RCW 9.41.050
Carrying firearms.


(1)(a) Except in the person's place of abode or fixed place of business, a person shall not carry a pistol concealed on his or her person without a license to carry a concealed pistol.
Click to expand...

I would believe it reasonable to assume that a person in a motor home/camper would qualify to carry in any manner they wished under RCW 9.41.060(8)
 
rapgood

rapgood

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
598
Location
Stanwood, WA
Regarding unloaded carry in a vehicle, I think that the limited interpretation of 9.41.050 having occurred after the legislature changed the statute in 1961 makes the meaning of 9.41.050(1) somewhat ambiguous.
State v. Ray said:
Further, an examination of the legislative history of this statute reveals a clear legislative intent to restrict the license language to the carrying of a concealed weapon on one's person. Prior to 1961, RCW 9.41.050 provided for the license language to modify both "vehicle" and "person." State v. Olsen, 43 Wn.2d 726, 263 P.2d 824 (1953). Similarly, RCW 9.41.070 provided for the issuance of two kinds of licenses, one for carrying a loaded pistol in a vehicle and one for carrying it concealed on one's person. However, in 1961 the legislature amended both of these statutes. [RCW 9.41.050] was amended so as to insert the language which now follows the word "vehicle," i.e., "unless it is unloaded," thereby interposing and distinguishing the vehicular exception from that which pertains to the person. Likewise, [RCW 9.41.070] was amended so as to delete that language which previously had authorized the issuance of a license for the carrying of a pistol in a vehicle. The clear legislative intent is to permit the carrying of a pistol in a vehicle only if the pistol is unloaded or the pistol is carried on the person of an individual who has a license therefor.
Click to expand...
To answer questions posed to me privately, I interpret this to mean that the legislative intent is to permit the carrying of a pistol in a vehicle only if the pistol is:
1) unloaded (regardless of where it is carried in the vehicle -- on a person or otherwise), or
2) if it is carried by a person with a CPL (regardless of whether it is loaded or not).
I couldn't find a case after 1961 that specifically addressed whether carrying an unloaded concealed pistol violates the statute. Which means that the law on the question is subject to judicial interpretation.
 
Last edited:
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
rapgood said:
Regarding unloaded carry in a vehicle, I think that the limited interpretation of 9.41.050 having occurred after the legislature changed the statute in 1961 makes the meaning of 9.41.050(1) somewhat ambiguous.

To answer questions posed to me privately, I interpret this to mean that the legislative intent is to permit the carrying of a pistol in a vehicle only if the pistol is:
1) unloaded (regardless of where it is carried in the vehicle -- on a person or otherwise), or
2) if it is carried by a person with a CPL (regardless of whether it is loaded or not).
I couldn't find a case after 1961 that specifically addressed whether carrying an unloaded concealed pistol violates the statute. Which means that the law on the question is subject to judicial interpretation.
Click to expand...

This may be true (is true) of .050... but too many people forget the exceptions to .050 granted in .060... ya think?
 
tombrewster421

tombrewster421

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
1,326
Location
Roy, WA
Difdi said:
There is no law against homicide in Washington either, you know. But killing people is still illegal and homicide is a handy descriptive term for it, just like brandishing is when it comes to waving a gun around in a manner that warrants alarm.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

9A.32.010 homicide defined.
homicide is the killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or omission of another, death occurring at any time, and is either (1) murder, (2) homicide by abuse, (3) manslaughter, (4) excusable homicide, or (5) justifiable homicide.
 
rapgood

rapgood

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
598
Location
Stanwood, WA
hermannr said:
This may be true (is true) of .050... but too many people forget the exceptions to .050 granted in .060... ya think?
Click to expand...

I don't know about how many people forget the .060 exceptions. You are correct that the .050 exceptions are enumerated in .060. But, as a practical matter, I suggest that one wouldn't want to rely on them for day-to-day carry because it is more likely than not that one would end up in court defending the matter and proving that the exception exists in a particular case if (s)he were to be stopped. Simply producing a CPL would probably resolve the question on the spot, thereby saving the defendant a lot of time and the $$$ (spent on me or my brethren) it would take to prove the applicability of the exception.
 
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
rapgood said:
I don't know about how many people forget the .060 exceptions. You are correct that the .050 exceptions are enumerated in .060. But, as a practical matter, I suggest that one wouldn't want to rely on them for day-to-day carry because it is more likely than not that one would end up in court defending the matter and proving that the exception exists in a particular case if (s)he were to be stopped. Simply producing a CPL would probably resolve the question on the spot, thereby saving the defendant a lot of time and the $$$ (spent on me or my brethren) it would take to prove the applicability of the exception.
Click to expand...

My understanding of common law is: It is up to the jurisdiction to PROVE I am not doing what I claim to be doing. It is NOT up to me to PROVE that what I say I am doing, is in fact what I am doing. A fishing pole in the back seat, or even the trunk might say something? No? I take a long walk at lunch (hiking), I am going to or coming from some outdoor recreational activity..

Totally an academic argument as I OC'd, unlicensed, from 1970 to 1994. I have OC'd, licensed, since. BTW: I have NEVER (since 1970) been asked for my CPL. Ever.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top