Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: I 594 Loop hole

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575

    I 594 Loop hole

    Godspyro over at Spokane Gun Trader (SGT) asked a good question today.

    "9.41.010
    (9) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder.
    (10) "Gun" has the same meaning as firearm.

    If a "firearm" is missing a bolt, slide etc it would not be capable of fireing a projectile and would not be concidered a firearm per state law correct?"

    I am thinking Godspyro may be correct since federal law does not prohibit selling a firearm if the sale was between private individuals that are both residents of Washington. No federal laws would be broken by selling two halves of a firearm in two separate transactions. I am also thinking that if my machined chunk of metal/plastic is incapable of firing projectiles then it does not meet the strict definition of a firearm under Washington State law I would not be buying a firearm and would not need to go through an FFL.

    I am also thinking I would not want to be the test case.

    Just to be clear I am open carrying as I type this. Blaze away.


    http://www.spokaneguntrader.com/view...389538#p389538
    Last edited by Jeff Hayes; 01-31-2015 at 06:06 PM.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Grim_Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington
    Posts
    792
    By that logic, it would be the same as selling a handgun with the barrel removed. Because without the single piece barrel and breech block, the handgun would be incapable of discharging a projectile. And the barrel and breech block by itself is incapable of discharging a projectile. The individual pieces of a firearm are not capable of discharging a projectile. Is this a case of the whole being greater then the sum of it's parts?
    Armed and annoyingly well informed!

    There are two constants when dealing with liberals:
    1) Liberals never quit until they are satisfied.
    2) Liberals are never satisfied.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227
    "Structuring" or "Intent."

    Take your pick, roll the dice and take your chances.
    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Interesting....

    Federal law definition of firearm:

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921



    Now, clearly the Washington state legislature was not interesting in using the same definition because the RCW definition of firearm is:

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.010



    1. There is no mention of a "device" in Federal law. Devices in RCW include such things as powder actuated nail guns and marine signaling 12 gauge flare guns (which the state has no interest in enforcing retail stores who are selling these "firearms" at retail in violation of I-594 even though selling two or more of these devices without a background check is a felony).

    2. There is no mention of the frame or receiver only in RCW.

    Now....if you sold or transferred both the frame/receiver and all the other parts of a firearm together in the same transaction, I think that constructive possession might be your problem.
    I agree that if you purchased a disassembled firearm from me that would likely not fly. I was thinking more along the lines of purchasing a stripped 1911 or AR lower from Mr. X and an upper from Mr.Y and a bolt carrier group from my local gun smith. Or a 1911 frame from Mr. X, a slide and barrel from Mr. Y and a parts kit from Nighthawk.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Grim_Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    I agree that if you purchased a disassembled firearm from me that would likely not fly. I was thinking more along the lines of purchasing a stripped 1911 or AR lower from Mr. X and an upper from Mr.Y and a bolt carrier group from my local gun smith. Or a 1911 frame from Mr. X, a slide and barrel from Mr. Y and a parts kit from Nighthawk.
    At that point, would the completed firearm require a serial number? You've basically taken parts from multiple different weapons and parts that were never attached to a weapon to create a completed firearm. You did it yourself for your own personal use.
    Armed and annoyingly well informed!

    There are two constants when dealing with liberals:
    1) Liberals never quit until they are satisfied.
    2) Liberals are never satisfied.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    I think a much more common scenario would be John Doe selling both a 1911 frame...and the slide+barrel "separately"...claiming, "nope, not a firearm" according to WA RCW.[/QUOTE]


    I am pretty sure that would not fly.

    But me buying a 1911 frame from you and a slide from Jim and a barrel from Bill would be IMHO perfectly lawful under current Washington state law. Just as it would be perfectly lawful for you top sell the barrel to Bill and the slide to Jim.

    Not suggesting we do this by any means, this is a conversation about the law as it is written.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim_Night View Post
    At that point, would the completed firearm require a serial number? You've basically taken parts from multiple different weapons and parts that were never attached to a weapon to create a completed firearm. You did it yourself for your own personal use.
    If you manufacture a firearm for your personal use serial numbers are not required. You can purchase an 80% AR lower finish the machine work, buy an upper, parts kit bolt carrier group and assemble it no serial numbers are required.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Grim_Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    If you manufacture a firearm for your personal use serial numbers are not required. You can purchase an 80% AR lower finish the machine work, buy an upper, parts kit bolt carrier group and assemble it no serial numbers are required.
    I understand that. I was talking about say taking parts from multiple different already existing firearms and putting them together into a new totally different firearm. Such as in your example here.

    But me buying a 1911 frame from you and a slide from Jim and a barrel from Bill would be IMHO perfectly lawful under current Washington state law. Just as it would be perfectly lawful for you top sell the barrel to Bill and the slide to Jim.
    Or this.

    I agree that if you purchased a disassembled firearm from me that would likely not fly. I was thinking more along the lines of purchasing a stripped 1911 or AR lower from Mr. X and an upper from Mr.Y and a bolt carrier group from my local gun smith. Or a 1911 frame from Mr. X, a slide and barrel from Mr. Y and a parts kit from Nighthawk.
    Armed and annoyingly well informed!

    There are two constants when dealing with liberals:
    1) Liberals never quit until they are satisfied.
    2) Liberals are never satisfied.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Well...according to Federal law only the frame or receiver is the firearm, but not according to RCW - only the entire device or weapon from which a projectile is fired - So....
    I just purchased a receiver for a mossberg shotgun. It was an extended bolt receiver ment to modify a tube mag to a box/drum mag. It was a serialized receiver, and as such had to be shipped to an FFL and of course, a bloody background check (in which I was delayed AGAIN). It was only a bag of parts, incapable of firing a twelve G round, but alas, the batf said "IT"S A GUN".

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    If you manufacture a firearm for your personal use serial numbers are not required. You can purchase an 80% AR lower finish the machine work, buy an upper, parts kit bolt carrier group and assemble it no serial numbers are required.
    All the above is Truth! One caveat is, you cannot sell the fruit of your labor. It is yours and you cannot transfer it.
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie View Post
    I just purchased a receiver for a mossberg shotgun. It was an extended bolt receiver ment to modify a tube mag to a box/drum mag. It was a serialized receiver, and as such had to be shipped to an FFL and of course, a bloody background check (in which I was delayed AGAIN). It was only a bag of parts, incapable of firing a twelve G round, but alas, the batf said "IT"S A GUN".



    All the above is Truth! One caveat is, you cannot sell the fruit of your labor. It is yours and you cannot transfer it.
    My understanding is that you can not manufacture a firearm with the intent of selling it but you can sell it at some point in the future without encountering a legal problem. I am guessing 3 days after completion would be way too soon but 3 years would be OK who knows where that line might be drawn by LE or the courts.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim_Night View Post
    I understand that. I was talking about say taking parts from multiple different already existing firearms and putting them together into a new totally different firearm. Such as in your example here.



    Or this.
    We are on the same page.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227
    You guys realize they aren't even willing to state how the law will be enforced. The can arrest anyone they want to... as a test case.

    Their budget is bigger. And the cops, prosecutor and judge all work for the same team.
    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

  13. #13
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990
    Just to add some confusion. My Sig Sauer 556xi has the UPPER that is serialized.
    "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

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by golddigger14s View Post
    Just to add some confusion. My Sig Sauer 556xi has the UPPER that is serialized.
    That is interesting and opens a whole new discussion.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  15. #15
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    this is a conversation about the law as it is written.
    It has become abundantly apparent that the law was written by idiots and voted for by even bigger idiots.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Unfortunately this law has provided the springboard and momentum for the same idiots to get more horrible laws passed through the unconstitutional initiative system. I do not believe in a democratic system of government - the general population cannot be trusted with 100% of the legislative process from cradle to grave.
    Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution guarantees us a republican form of government. IMHO initiatives at a state level violate the Constitution.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Unfortunately this law has provided the springboard and momentum for the same idiots to get more horrible laws passed through the unconstitutional initiative system. I do not believe in a democratic system of government - the general population cannot be trusted with 100% of the legislative process from cradle to grave.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution guarantees us a republican form of government. IMHO initiatives at a state level violate the Constitution.
    Tyranny of the majority.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Real loophole

    The real loophole....

    I lost my gun..... (no law says I have to report a lost/stolen firearm)

    You lost $500..... (no law says you have to report a lost/stolen pile of cash)


    Live Free or Die!

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Interesting, modern smokeless powder is not an explosive, it burns and the resulting expanding gasses propel the projectile.
    Black powder is an explosive, but most modern day firearms do not use this as a propellant.

    Just goes to show the people writing these laws/definitions have no clue what they are talking about
    Last edited by MattinWA; 03-03-2015 at 12:45 AM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    I caution all y'all against conflating "may" with "can." While an object might be missing a barrel or trigger or hammer or whatever, and therefore can't be used to launch a projectile, the object still may be used to do so (by adding the missing part or parts). You may be dancing along a very slippery slope.
    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.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    I caution all y'all against conflating "may" with "can." While an object might be missing a barrel or trigger or hammer or whatever, and therefore can't be used to launch a projectile, the object still may be used to do so (by adding the missing part or parts). You may be dancing along a very slippery slope.
    That is why we are talking about it, some ideas work out and some do not.

    Personally I will never purchase another firearm in Washington.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim_Night View Post
    At that point, would the completed firearm require a serial number? You've basically taken parts from multiple different weapons and parts that were never attached to a weapon to create a completed firearm. You did it yourself for your own personal use.
    If a serialized "receiver/lower is used, that part is already a "firearm". If you cut your own receiver/lower and "make" a firearm, you need not mark it in any way. It is recommended (by batf) to do so. Good luck with that. I saw an AR15 lower marked to match a full auto xme-177 that was "lost in a tragic boating accident" in SE Asia. I have also seen pirate talk and hello kitty roll marks. Go figure.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    That is why we are talking about it, some ideas work out and some do not.

    Personally I will never purchase another firearm in Washington.
    Why change anything? I have aquired a half dozen firearms since 594. Some nics, some not. Come get me coppers! I build my own guns and do not do background checks on myself. I have told me that I am too pretty to be a criminal and I believe me.
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  23. #23
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227
    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    I caution all y'all against conflating "may" with "can." While an object might be missing a barrel or trigger or hammer or whatever, and therefore can't be used to launch a projectile, the object still may be used to do so (by adding the missing part or parts). You may be dancing along a very slippery slope.
    If person "A" is legally drunk and driving, he can get cited for DUI.

    If person "A" is legally drunk, legally parked and sitting in the drivers seat of a parked car, then he can get cited for DUI.

    Can person "A" be cited for DUI if he is legally drunk, and sitting in the drivers seat of a parked car that is MISSING THE DAMN ENGINE?!

    Common sense. Something the law, cops, judges and lawyers lack.

    Justice isn't just blind, she's a money grubbing prostitute and a moron.
    Last edited by Dave_pro2a; 03-04-2015 at 02:05 AM.
    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

Posting Permissions

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