Can this be true?

imported post

Ok, so I'm cruising through the RCW's a few days ago and noticed something odd. I went back to double check my findings today, because it seemed like it was just too good to be true.

In RCW 9.41.050 it states:

(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.

(b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so. Any violation of this subsection (1)(b) shall be a class 1 civil infraction under chapter 7.80 RCW and shall be punished accordingly pursuant to chapter 7.80 RCW and the infraction rules for courts of limited jurisdiction.

Click to expand...

Wait.

WHAT?

It's not a 'CRIME' (felony or misdemeanor) to carry a concealed pistol in Washington? (vehicle carry sans CPL receives special consideration....its a class 1 misdemeanor) So just what IS the punishment for a violation then?

(1) A person found to have committed a civil infraction shall be assessed a monetary penalty.

(a) The maximum penalty and the default amount for a class 1 civil infraction shall be two hundred fifty dollars, not including statutory assessments, except for an infraction of state law involving potentially dangerous litter as specified in RCW 70.93.060(4) and an infraction of state law involving violent video or computer games under RCW 9.91.180, in which case the maximum penalty and default amount is five hundred dollars;

Click to expand...

A $250 fine. That's it. $250 and NO CRIMINAL RECORD. You do lose your CPL (if you have one) but you still keep all of your firearms rights. The citation procedure doesn't even make provisions for an arrest....merely 'detaine, cite, release'.


Am I reading this right? :what:

imported post

Phssthpok wrote:

Am I reading this right? :what:

Click to expand...

Nope.

See the part where it specifically says "this subsection (1)(b)" and how subsection (1)(b) only deals with "Licensees", so anyone that isn't already licensed with a CPL isn't covered by this subsection. I think what they're trying to do here is make it a civil infraction for someone who's otherwise legal to carry concealed if they forget their permit, while still prosecuting illegal concealment as a crime.

IANAL.

imported post

I would worry that this MIGHT also give them legal justification to confiscate your gun so figure in at least another $300 or more loss.

imported post

I'd rather spend the $250 on ammo.

But it's nice to know I won't spend the night in jail if I forget my card.

imported post

I have photo-copied my CPL (scanned to a .jpg file, then printed) and carry that in my wallet, while the original and my other permits are in a leather case. Because I often dash out for for some sudden necessity I don't bother getting the leather case as I don't have a shirt pocket and don't want to put it in a hip pocket (all that weight on it, you know). I do need a permit as I'm always armed if I'm wearing pants. I consider this to be legal. Just_a_car, what about you?

MD

imported post

"I do need a permit as I'm always armed if I'm wearing pants"

Do you often go out in public with out your pants?



Bill

imported post

Bill45 wrote:

"I do need a permit as I'm always armed if I'm wearing pants"

Do you often go out in public with out your pants?



Bill

Click to expand...

Well, for me it depends on how bad the house fire is, and how much beer was involved...

Just kidding, I'd never wear pants and drink beer while watching my house burn down...:lol: