AGO Definition on RCW 9.41.060 (Washington's Hiking, Hunting, Fishing execption)

[m1gunr]

Download the PDF file here: <broken link removed>


The statute allows law enforcement latitude to evaluate each situation on a case by case basis. The scenario you portray could very well result in a finding of violation of the law. The case would turn on the credibility of the individual claiming the exception. The individual's case would of course be stronger if he or she wore hiking gear and had hiking supplies, etc. The purpose of the law is to make personal protection available to outdoor enthusiasts, and not serve as an end run around the state's regulation of firearms.

Read More

 

[hermannr]

m1gunner, That is how I have always understood this section, who were you addressing with this?

 

[chariot13]

This is very similiar to Oregons exception for concealed carry while hunting & fishing without a concealed carry license. Alot of hunters as well as fishermen hike in prior to the season to check out the area & see if it would be viable for the hunting season. It wouldn't make much sense to be out in these area's without hiking gear anyways.

 

[m1gunr]

My reason for posting this was that some folks could not grasp the concept of the way that the law was written. So I found a way to get the question answered from the Attorney generals Office (it took 9 months).

The issue has been whether you could drive across the state using the exemption in RCW 9.41.060 - According to the AGO that issue has now been clarified.

 

[Misterbill]

Good work. And frankly, 9 months or not, that's a pretty darned good response. If you'd sent that letter on an identical statute in a dozen states I can think of off the top of my head, you would have got bupkis.