RichardDavies
Regular Member
imported post
RCW 9.41.060 states:
Could someone please provide me with an explanation of what this means? It seems to me it's saying that if you are hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, etc. outdoors, then you aren't bound by the restriction to have a license to carry a concealed firearm or to have a loaded weapon in a vehicle.
Since this exception applies even when traveling to or from a recreation area, what's to stop someone from claiming that they were just on their way to or from a hiking trip? Of course it all depends on if it's "reasonable to conclude" that they're telling the truth, but this seems like a big loophole around the need to have a CHL. Which makes me think my interpretation probably isn't correct.
I haven't heard this exception mentioned anywhere else when discussing the various laws & exceptions around carrying a gun, so I'm curious to see what you all have to say about it.
RCW 9.41.060 states:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.060The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:
.
.
.
(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;
Could someone please provide me with an explanation of what this means? It seems to me it's saying that if you are hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, etc. outdoors, then you aren't bound by the restriction to have a license to carry a concealed firearm or to have a loaded weapon in a vehicle.
Since this exception applies even when traveling to or from a recreation area, what's to stop someone from claiming that they were just on their way to or from a hiking trip? Of course it all depends on if it's "reasonable to conclude" that they're telling the truth, but this seems like a big loophole around the need to have a CHL. Which makes me think my interpretation probably isn't correct.
I haven't heard this exception mentioned anywhere else when discussing the various laws & exceptions around carrying a gun, so I'm curious to see what you all have to say about it.