WA State Gun Transfers Law Passing

Treading carefully to avoid politics.

I -594 in Washington state passed. It appears this will prevent sharing of firearms if applied broadly. Until the courts have some case law about it, Washington citizens should be careful about using someone else's firearm.

From the text of the law.

(25) "Transfer" means the intended delivery of a firearm to
another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment
including, but not limited to, gifts and loans.

Full text
http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf

A heads up as signatures are being gathered for the same Initiative in Nevada, so other states may soon have similar laws. Montana and Arizona have been talked about by I 594 supporters too.

I believe that if you read on in Section 3 you will find broad (broad enough) exceptions to guide you through the firearm transfer process should you be an unlicensed dealer. There are for example exceptions for gift transfers to family members, antique firearms, and to minors for hunting, among others. Simple use of a buddy's firearm at a range or while hunting does not appear to be materially impeded. The law seeks to prevent transfers to felons. There are requirements and consequences if you transfer firearms to felons. To non-felons, not so much. When in doubt, the law provides for use of a licensed dealer to perform a background check before a transfer takes place. As with the US Constitution generally, consider reading the entire law in context.

Disclaimer: gun owner, NRA member who voted in Favor of I-594

As it is too early to have court decisions what this law entails, you cannot know for sure. The Department of Licensing doesn't have anything on their web site yet.

Here is a flow chart of potential issues with sharing firearms.
http://i.imgur.com/QLMj1Em.png
(click twice to enlarge)

Agree or not with the initiative, it is not that clear. Hopefully it is as you say.

Having witnessed how some friends made out in the immigration system, I'd say "not knowing for sure" how a rule might actually be applied is something they'd sympathize with. Lawyers and government officials are no help because nobody knows until they know. This just seems like the nature of any new legislation. A felony for misconstruing a gun law is probably better than getting permanently kicked out of the country you've devoted all your life and resources because of some paperwork.

No political commentary in this thread, please.



chaosmagnet

Federal Lawsuit filed.

Here is part

"3. I-594 is also so vague that a person of ordinary intelligence cannot understand
its scope, which renders it subject to arbitrary enforcement. For example, it is unclear whether
I-594 applies in situations involving the following types of activity: family members’ common
use of a firearm stored in the family’s gun-safe, where no delivery takes place to another
person; employees’ common use of a firearm stored in a company’s gun-safe, where no
delivery takes place to another person; the intended delivery of a firearm to a common carrier,
such as FedEx, for the purposes of shipping; the intended delivery of a firearm to a storage
facility, such as a safety deposit box; the intended delivery of a firearm to airline personnel for
the purpose of checking the firearm to the passenger’s destination; exchanges of firearms at a
firing range when those firearms are not permanently kept at the range; the return of a firearm
from a law enforcement officer after an individual provides it for inspection during an
investigative stop; and the intended delivery of a firearm that is property of a trust from one
trustee of the trust to another. The agencies of the State of Washington have so far either
disclaimed the responsibility to interpret I-594 or provided interpretations that are so far
removed from the language as to be useless. "

http://www.thegunmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/NWSSvFergie.pdf

What about simply moving to the state with your own firearms? That's not apparently covered either.

No political commentary in this thread, please.



chaosmagnet

Well, some of this was just resolved. Inslee signed a reform bill that---

"Restores the ability of federally-licensed collectors of curios and relics to conduct normal activities under federal guidance when the item is defined as a curio or relic under the federal law;

Restores the ability of security guards, employees, and volunteers to conduct normal business;

Expands the formerly narrow definition of “family member” for the purpose of transfers;

Exempts transfers for the prevention of suicide and self-inflicted bodily injury; and,

Exempts transfers when in the actual presence of the owner.

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc_applauds_wa_gov_inslee_s_signing_of_sb_5552_gun_law_reform_bill

Perhaps you should read the entire bill in context.