RCW 9.41.060 Exceptions

irfner · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Does item 6 of RCW 9.41.060 create an exception allowing a person to carry a loaded firearm in their car when going to or from the gun club? Orfor a non licenced person to carry concealed when going to or from the club?

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.060

nofoa · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Why not just pay the 60 bucks and get the CPL? Washington is a shall issue state after all.

tjschul · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Yes I belive it is an exception. Point blank asked an LEO at an IPSC match that question a couple of years ago, and got that answer.

My advice on permits...don't waste your time/money on a WA permit. Get the Utah
permit (for many reasons)

OJ

joeroket · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

It does in subsection 6 if it is an organized club for the purpose of target shooting and you are going to or from the target shoot meeting place.

Keep in mind that it would be up to the person to proove that tothe the officer at the time of the stop or the judge if you are unable to convince the officer. In my opinion it just is not worth it.

nofoa · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

tjschul wrote:

Yes I belive it is an exception. Point blank asked an LEO at an IPSC match that question a couple of years ago, and got that answer.

My advice on permits...don't waste your time/money on a WA permit. Get the Utah
permit (for many reasons)

OJ

Might as well get both Utah and WA! :celebrate

tjschul · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Actually I meant instead of the WA permit. Once you have that, there's no reason whatever for the WA permit.

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/utpermit.htm

http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/CFPHome.html

joeroket · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

tjschul wrote:

Actually I meant instead of the WA permit. Once you have that, there's no reason whatever for the WA permit.

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/utpermit.htm

http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/CFPHome.html

For all due purposes you do not need a Wa if you have a Utah permit. It would be easier to obtain a Utah permit though.

eBratt · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

If you are a resident of WA, your UT permit is worthless. As per the RCW on reciprocity, 9.41.073 (1)(b):

This section applies to a license holder from another state only while the license holder is not a resident of this state.

So if you are a resident of WA, you certainly do need a WA permit, even if you do have a Utah one.

This does present a dilemma with moving to WA because as soon as you become a resident (get a drivers license) your UT permit is invalid and you are disarmed until your WA resident permit comes (which is usually pretty quick, thankfully) and you can't apply for a WA license to carry (out of state address is now bad and you aren't a resident), so you are stuck in limbo.

tjschul · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

I must admit I didn't know the RCW had that provision in it.
I never heard that said once while going through the Utah class,
and have emailed my instructor for a clarification. It really makes no sence except for the desire to generate revenue, since the permit requirments are so lax in this state.
I still have a valid WA permit , but had no intention of renewing it
after 2009. Oh well, only 32 bucks, I'll screw the state out of that somewhere else easily.
I'll still use it (Utah) in the other states that honor it while traveling.

deanf · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Keep in mind that it would be up to the person to proove that tothe the officer at the time of the stop or the judge if you are unable to convince the officer.

Uh, that's not the way it works in this country. The state has the burden of proof in criminal cases.

The state would have to prove the exception didn't apply to you.

Dave_pro2a · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

joeroket wrote:

It does in subsection 6 if it is an organized club for the purpose of target shooting and you are going to or from the target shoot meeting place.

Keep in mind that it would be up to the person to proove that tothe the officer at the time of the stop or the judge if you are unable to convince the officer. In my opinion it just is not worth it.

It's been so long I forget the details, but it's something like this:

One of my east coast relatives lives in a state with very unfriendly CCW laws.

Thier administrative code has the same exemption about carrying a loaded firearm to and from a shooting range.

There are 'shooting clubs' that are open nearly 24 hours. They sell memberships, butin essence they are selling the service of "carry a gun whenever you want, and if you get stopped just tell the cop you are coming here."

Can't remember the state.

Right Wing Wacko · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Dont forget this exception:

(8) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area;

Shoot... unless I'm going to work I'm ALWAYS engaging in a lawfull outdoor activity

XD45PlusP · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

joeroket wrote:

tjschul wrote:

Actually I meant instead of the WA permit. Once you have that, there's no reason whatever for the WA permit.

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/utpermit.htm

http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/CFPHome.html

Click to expand...

For all due purposes you do not need a Wa if you have a Utah permit. It would be easier to obtain a Utah permit though.

Be careful about using a Non-Resident Permit/License if not a resident of that state, relying on Recirprocity within other states, and being within 1000ft of a school zone.... Please read this....

"The Gun Control Act of 1968,

[align=left]including the Gun-Free School Zones Act, 18 V.S.C.[/align]
[align=left]§ 922(q). The Gun-Free School Zones Act provides that it[/align]
[align=left]is unlawful for any individual to knowingly possess or[/align]
[align=left]discharge a firearm in a place that the individual knows or[/align]
[align=left]has reasonable cause to believe is a school zone, if the[/align]
[align=left]firearm has moved in or otherwise affects interstate or[/align]
[align=left]foreign commerce. A school zone is defined to include any[/align]
[align=left]place in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial, or[/align]
[align=left]private elementary or secondary school, or within 1,000[/align]
[align=left]feet of the school grounds.[/align]
[align=left]The law provides certain exceptions to the general ban on[/align]
[align=left]possession of firearms in school zones. One exception is[/align]
[align=left]where the individual possessing the firearm "is licensed[/align]
[align=left]to do so by the State in which the school zone is located[/align]
[align=left]or a political subdivision of the State. . ." See[/align]
18 D.S.C. § 922 (q) (2) (B) (ii). A license qualifies as an

[align=left]exception only if the law of the State or political[/align]
[align=left]subdivision requires law enforcement authorities to verify[/align]
[align=left]that the individual is qualified under law to receive the[/align]
[align=left]license.[/align]
[align=left]The law clearly provides that in order to qualify as an[/align]
[align=left]exception to the general prohibitions of the Gun-Free[/align]
[align=left]School Zones Act, the license must be issued by the State[/align]
[align=left]in which the school zone is located or a political[/align]
[align=left]subdivision of that State. A concealed weapons license or[/align]
[align=left]permit from any otper State would not satisfy the criteria[/align]
[align=left]set forth in the law.[/align]
[align=left]For purposes of the GFSZA, in order to fall within this[/align]
[align=left]limited exception, the permit must be issued by the State[/align]
itself.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/batf_school_zone.pdf

tjschul · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

Just got this back from a very reputable instructor in Onalaska in regard to whether
I need to keep my WA permit along with my Utah permit to be legal for WA concealed
carry:

[/i]"Yes, WA law reads that reciprocity is only for out of staters, that you have to have the license from WA if you are a WA resident."

heresolong · Dec 24, 2007

imported post

XD45PlusP wrote:

joeroket wrote:

tjschul wrote:

Actually I meant instead of the WA permit. Once you have that, there's no reason whatever for the WA permit.

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/utpermit.htm

http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/CFPHome.html

Click to expand...

For all due purposes you do not need a Wa if you have a Utah permit. It would be easier to obtain a Utah permit though.

Click to expand...

Be careful about using a Non-Resident Permit/License if not a resident of that state, relying on Recirprocity within other states, and being within 1000ft of a school zone.... Please read this....

"The Gun Control Act of 1968,

I was under the impression that big chunks of the school zone act were tossed by the courts due to little things like roads that run within 1000 ft of schools, houses that people live in that are within... etc.

Might want to check on the current status of this one. I'm pretty sure they can't bust you for legally carrying within 1000 feet of a school unless you are on school property. AFAIK

XD45PlusP · Dec 25, 2007

imported post

heresolong wrote:

XD45PlusP wrote:

joeroket wrote:

tjschul wrote:

Actually I meant instead of the WA permit. Once you have that, there's no reason whatever for the WA permit.

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/utpermit.htm

http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/CFPHome.html

Click to expand...

For all due purposes you do not need a Wa if you have a Utah permit. It would be easier to obtain a Utah permit though.

Click to expand...

Be careful about using a Non-Resident Permit/License if not a resident of that state, relying on Recirprocity within other states, and being within 1000ft of a school zone.... Please read this....

"The Gun Control Act of 1968,

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that big chunks of the school zone act were tossed by the courts due to little things like roads that run within 1000 ft of schools, houses that people live in that are within... etc.

Might want to check on the current status of this one. I'm pretty sure they can't bust you for legally carrying within 1000 feet of a school unless you are on school property. AFAIK

The only thing different is the adding of "Congress Shall/Does Regulate Interstate Commerce" to make it "So-Called" Constitutional, which I say give me a freaking break!:what:

http://wise.fau.edu/~tunick/courses/conlaw/gunlaw.html

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/gun_free_school_zones.txt

joeroket · Dec 25, 2007

imported post

deanf wrote:

Keep in mind that it would be up to the person to proove that tothe the officer at the time of the stop or the judge if you are unable to convince the officer.

Click to expand...

Uh, that's not the way it works in this country. The state has the burden of proof in criminal cases.

The state would have to prove the exception didn't apply to you.

Uh that is the way it is. The officer is a fact gatherer. The state, as you put it, is the courts system.

RCW 9.41.060 Exceptions

irfner

Campaign Veteran

nofoa

Regular Member

tjschul

Regular Member

joeroket

Regular Member

nofoa

Regular Member

tjschul

Regular Member

joeroket

Regular Member

eBratt

Regular Member

tjschul

Regular Member

deanf

Regular Member

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member

Right Wing Wacko

Campaign Veteran

XD45PlusP

Regular Member

tjschul

Regular Member

heresolong

Regular Member

XD45PlusP

Regular Member

joeroket

Regular Member