Washington Carrying & transport of AOWs / Firearms vs pistols / rifles

[bradsteen]

I know WA state law differentiates between pistols and rifles regarding condition of storage in transport (i.e. transporting a pistol vs rifle with a mag in and/or a round chambered). Anyone happen to know how the law applies to AOWs (i.e. pistol with VFG) and Firearms (i.e. Mossbeeg Shockwave)?

Read More

 

[Yarome]

I know WA state law differentiates between pistols and rifles regarding condition of storage in transport (i.e. transporting a pistol vs rifle with a mag in and/or a round chambered). Anyone happen to know how the law applies to AOWs (i.e. pistol with VFG) and Firearms (i.e. Mossbeeg Shockwave)?

Your "pistol with a VFG", currently... is still just a pistol and not an AOW. Subject to the same laws as any other handgun. Your AOW though would have the same restrictions as a long gun.


Edited for brain fart. VFG, not a brace... my bad. Both subject to long gun rules then.

 

[User 1234]

Your "pistol with a VFG", currently... is still just a pistol and not an AOW. Subject to the same laws as any other handgun. Your AOW though would have the same restrictions as a long gun.

A pistol with a vertical front grip is an AOW. That's true in all 50 states thanks to the NFA.

 

[Yarome]

A pistol with a vertical front grip is an AOW. That's true in all 50 states thanks to the NFA.

Oh yeah! NFA stamped so.... same rules as the long guns. My bad!

For some reason... at that hour of night... my eyes saw "VFG" and my brain read "brace"....

 

[bradsteen]

Ok. What about Firearms? AR pistols greater than 26" in length, mossberg shockwave, etc? They aren't NFA items, and legally aren't considered shoulder-fired weapons.

 

[User 1234]

AOW status does not cause the firearm
to be treated like a long gun in Washington.

 

[User 1234]

RCW 9.41.010: Definitions.

Note that with a vertical front grip a firearm is no longer designed to be fired with one hand, so it wouldn't be a "pistol" under Washington law if the barrel was 16" or longer.

 

[Yarome]

AOW status does not cause the firearm
to be treated like a long gun in Washington.

For the purpose of transport in a vehicle it does... or I guess if we're splitting hairs... the laws for transporting AOW's would be the same as the laws for transporting long guns. Happy?

 

[bradsteen]

(26) "Pistol" means any firearm with a barrel less than ((sixteen))16 inches in length, OR is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.

The way I read this barrel length and # of hands needed to be used are exclusive requirements. Either one would classify a firearm as a pistol. So wouldn't AOWs and Firearms be considered pistols according to WA law?

 

[User 1234]

RCW 77.15.460: Loaded rifle or shotgun in vehicle—Unlawful use or possession—Unlawful use of a loaded firearm—Penalty.

Going back to the statute prohibiting possession of loaded rifles or shotguns in vehicles, note that it doesn't say "firearms other than pistols.". It covers rifles or shotguns.

In Washington State an SBR fits the definition of pistol and the definition of rifle. An AOW, not intended to be fired from the shoulder, not ever having had a stock (and I would also say never having had a brace because that is asking to be a test case), should not be considered a rifle or shotgun. But that does not mean a police officer or prosecutor wouldn't charge someone criminally, or seize the firearm, or that a court would rule in a way that was fair or correct. Sometimes the process is the punishment. Sometimes people are convicted of crimes in circumstances we would think are unfair or flat out wrong.

 

[User 1234]

The way I read this barrel length and # of hands needed to be used are exclusive requirements. Either one would classify a firearm as a pistol. So wouldn't AOWs and Firearms be considered pistols according to WA law?

That is how I read it, yes, as to AOW's. An HK SP89 with vertical front grip and tax stamp, never having had a stock. For "firearms" that are "other" (which is not the same thing as Any Other Weapon), it would depend on the exact configuration of that weapon.

 

[Yarome]

I wasn't considering what is and what isn't a rife or AOW or "other" as being applicable to the OP. Only what WA allows in terms of vehicle transport.

Which is... loaded handguns/pistols may be carried with a CHL. Anything else, or if you don't have a CHL... they must be secured. "Whatever" else it is classified as is moot, isn't it.

KISS

 

[User 1234]

Which is... loaded handguns/pistols may be carried with a CHL. Anything else, or if you don't have a CHL... they must be secured.

Do you have a cite for this? A Washington statute or court decision which says that a non-pistol, non-rifle, non-shotgun cannot be carried loaded in a vehicle in Washington state? I have not seen one, but it is possible there is one.

 

[Yarome]

Do you have a cite for this? A Washington statute or court decision which says that a non-pistol, non-rifle, non-shotgun cannot be carried loaded in a vehicle in Washington state? I have not seen one, but it is possible there is one.

You gotta be kidding me, right??

 

[User 1234]

It is possible that my perception is wrong, and I can't guarantee anyone that such a law doesn't exist. However you made a statement that such a law exists, so I was asking what you base that on.

 

[Yarome]

It is possible that my perception is wrong, and I can't guarantee anyone that such a law doesn't exist. However you made a statement that such a law exists, so I was asking what you base that on.

If you read again... what I said was:

"Which is... loaded handguns/pistols may be carried with a CHL. Anything else, or if you don't have a CHL... they must be secured. "Whatever" else it is classified as is moot, isn't it."

Meaning that the only exception to the "secure transport" law is for handguns/pistols and only if you have a CHL.

I made no such mention of a law specifically regarding NFA AOW's or "other" firearms, but I can bet there is no loophole in WA state law that allows you to carry them loaded in your vehicle.