Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Can this person get a CPL?

  1. #1
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    I got a buddy who got a misdemeanor brandishing weapons charge a few years ago. Long story short he scared off some punks with an airsoft gun and the five-oh smacked him with the charge.

    Will he be able to get his CPL if he applies for it?

    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    killchain wrote:
    I got a buddy who got a misdemeanor brandishing weapons charge a few years ago. Long story short he scared off some punks with an airsoft gun and the five-oh smacked him with the charge.

    Will he be able to get his CPL if he applies for it?
    He should be able to. That charge should not preclude him from owning a firearm or receiving a CPL.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  3. #3
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    Alright then.

    Thanks.
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

  4. #4
    Regular Member Aryk45XD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    513

    Post imported post

    killchain wrote:
    Long story short he scared off some punks with an airsoft gun and the five-oh smacked him with the charge.
    Just a question sort of related to this: If you're in a condition of extreme necessity and pull your weapon, but hesitate, is there more of a chance you may be charged rather than just pulling the trigger. (eg. Pull it while in the back of a store while a BG in the front starts stabbing the clerk on the ground and runs when you yell as you make your through the isle.) Figured the senerio would help keep the answer simple.

    Add: ...Or does it even matter since you stopped the attack.
    With great power comes great ummm... big holes!?

  5. #5
    Regular Member Lammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    581

    Post imported post

    killchain wrote:
    I got a buddy who got a misdemeanor brandishing weapons charge a few years ago. Long story short he scared off some punks with an airsoft gun and the five-oh smacked him with the charge.

    Will he be able to get his CPL if he applies for it?
    Was he convicted or just cited? If he was convicted I think the answer is probably. If he was only cited and it was later dismissed as justifiable as self defense thent ther should be no problem. Now, on to the details. Washington does not have an offense called "brandishing". What we do have is this:
    - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    RCW 9.41.270
    Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm — Unlawful carrying or handling — Penalty — Exceptions.
    (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.
    (2) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (1) above shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. If any person is convicted of a violation of subsection (1) of this section, the person shall lose his or her concealed pistol license, if any. The court shall send notice of the revocation to the department of licensing, and the city, town, or county which issued the license.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Note that a conviction for what we call Intimidation With A Weapon will result in revocation of an existing CPL. Further, RCW 9.41.070(1)(b) provides for denial of a CPL application is the applicant's CPL is in revoked status. If you don't already have a CPL and are convicted of Intimidation there is no CPL to revoke. So, it looks like an intimidation conviction would not be a bar to issuance of a new, first time CPL.

    Now, if your buddy's conviction was in another state and wasn't a felony then there should be no problem. RCW 9.41.270 only requires revocation for a violation of RCW 9.41.270, not for violation of any other statute.
    PS - - IAAL but nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice or to establish an attorney/client relationship.

    IAALBIAAFTDPASNIPHCBCALA
    Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out. (John Corapi, The Black Sheep Dog)
    Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. (Groucho Marx)

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    This is why you call the cops first. Even if you think the situation is done. I "displayed" my shotgun when Sudden Valley security was getting out of hand and wouldn't leave my property, but I also called 911 and told them I under the impression they had weapons too.

    Not even a warning, and was told by deputy and trooper I was within my rights. Things would have been different if the call security made, (lying bastards) went through first.
    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)

  7. #7
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    Lammo wrote
    Was he convicted or just cited? If he was convicted I think the answer is probably. If he was only cited and it was later dismissed as justifiable as self defense thent ther should be no problem. Now, on to the details. Washington does not have an offense called "brandishing". What we do have is this:
    - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    RCW 9.41.270
    Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm — Unlawful carrying or handling — Penalty — Exceptions.
    (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.
    (2) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (1) above shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. If any person is convicted of a violation of subsection (1) of this section, the person shall lose his or her concealed pistol license, if any. The court shall send notice of the revocation to the department of licensing, and the city, town, or county which issued the license.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Note that a conviction for what we call Intimidation With A Weapon will result in revocation of an existing CPL. Further, RCW 9.41.070(1)(b) provides for denial of a CPL application is the applicant's CPL is in revoked status. If you don't already have a CPL and are convicted of Intimidation there is no CPL to revoke. So, it looks like an intimidation conviction would not be a bar to issuance of a new, first time CPL.

    Now, if your buddy's conviction was in another state and wasn't a felony then there should be no problem. RCW 9.41.270 only requires revocation for a violation of RCW 9.41.270, not for violation of any other statute.
    PS - - IAAL but nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice or to establish an attorney/client relationship.
    He was driving in a car, busted out the airsoft on another person in another car, and in his opinion for his own defense. Yes, he was convicted. Under what you cited, he had no CPL so I guess he's good.

    Sorry I'm being so vague guys. He's a lurker here, and it ain't my business to be dropping all of the giblets on what happened. I just want to know if I should still pester him to get his damn CPL. Hahaha.
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

Posting Permissions

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