Is bill HB1143 based on purchase date or transfer date

[arakboss]

I'm not sure that is going to work. I went to Fisherman's and they have signs saying ANY firearm purchase will have to be sent to a WA FFL. I might be wrong…

Lots of Oregon FFLs quit doing transfers for WA residents but some still do them.

 

[Vrod]

Just bought a bolt gun at Cabela's in Tualatin. I did get approved before the new law and picked it up there on Friday. I was told last week before the approval if the BGC came in after the 31st, I would have to take the online class and wait another 10 days but could still pick it up there.

 

[Sporting Systems]

I did the free class from Sporting Systems yesterday. I assume you could do it on your mobile phone but am not sure if their website for the training is compatible.

For anyone who hasn't seen this and lives in WA State, you need to complete this training or similar to purchase a firearm in WA State going forward.... HB 1143

Free HB-1143/I-1639 Firearms Safety Training Program

Get WA firearm safety certified (HB1143) online & for FREE. Easy, convenient, legal solution. Get started right now! Sporting Systems Firearms and Ammo.

sporting-systems.com

It is. About 75% of folks are using a mobile to do it.

 

[Sporting Systems]

How much time investment was involved, did you get proof of completion right away?

It's up to each participant.

 

[Sporting Systems]

I'm not sure that is going to work. I went to Fisherman's and they have signs saying ANY firearm purchase will have to be sent to a WA FFL. I might be wrong…

Out of state FFL's are required to follow the laws of the purchaser's state of residence, that is federal law. Some FFLs know this, others don't.

 

[Stomper]

What's HB1143 based on you ask?


Answer: pure, utter…. BULL $HIT!!

That's what.

 

[Sporting Systems]

I don't think that will help the process along one little bit. They want a separate BGC for every transaction. After all, you may have fallen off the wagon since the last one.

CPL hasn't impacted purchases since July 2019.

 

[srxfan]

I have looked through the Sporting Systems Course, it is definitely doable on mobile. Really appreciate y'all putting that together!

 

[Ducati_Meister]

I don't think that will help the process along one little bit. They want a separate BGC for every transaction. After all, you may have fallen off the wagon since the last one.

You're right about that, 1639 took away the ability for CPL holders to get the check done on the spot at your FFL with no waiting period when buying a handgun. One of the insidious things that many found out after 1639 was passed by the anti gun soccer moms.

 

[arakboss]

Out of state FFL's are required to follow the laws of the purchaser's state of residence, that is federal law. Some FFLs know this, others don't.

To add to that the FFL also has to follow laws of the State they are licensed in. When those laws conflict with each other, it causes a gray area.

In addition, a licensee may sell a rifle or shotgun to a person who is not a resident of the state where the licensee's business premises is located in an over–the–counter transaction, provided the transaction complies with state law in the state where the licensee is located and in the state where the purchaser resides



WA law regarding WA residents buying firearms out of State.


Out-of-state purchasing.
Residents of Washington may purchase rifles and shotguns in a state other than Washington: PROVIDED, That such residents conform to the applicable provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, Title IV, Pub. L. 90-351 as administered by the United States secretary of the treasury: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That such residents are eligible to purchase or possess such weapons in Washington and in the state in which such purchase is made: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That when any part of the transaction takes place in Washington , including, but not limited to, internet sales, such residents are subject to the procedures and background checks required by this chapter

 

[arakboss]

Is there an exhaustive list of items that will serve as proof of the training requirement?

 

[gmerkt]

Out-of-state purchasing.
Residents of Washington may purchase rifles and shotguns in a state other than Washington: PROVIDED, That such residents conform to the applicable provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, Title IV, Pub. L. 90-351 as administered by the United States secretary of the treasury: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That such residents are eligible to purchase or possess such weapons in Washington and in the state in which such purchase is made: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That when any part of the transaction takes place in Washington , including, but not limited to, internet sales, such residents are subject to the procedures and background checks required by this chapter

I don't see anything in the above that says I cannot buy a long gun in Post Falls, ID and walk out the door with it same day.

 

[Sporting Systems]

Is there an exhaustive list of items that will serve as proof of the training requirement?

There is no definition of what the "proof" of training consists of. It just has to be seen by the dealer. Dealer has no obligation to validate the certificate, and there is no approved training as blessed by the state. A Cheerio box that has a name and date on it, and says it's 1143 training...who's to judge? No definition. Not asking for more definitions, bad laws don't need more rules.

Before, under the 1639 requirements, the Firearms Transfer Application, the purchaser attested that they took a class that meet the requirements of i-1639. That part of the form is gone now, now there is a separate question, #21 I believe, that asks the buyer if they are eligible to purchase a firearm and they sign that form. So, the purchaser is still attesting they are able to purchase, by meeting all RCWs'

What's funny, no funny is the lengths some dealers, will go to to make it harder....

CMP won't take our class certificate for CMP sales, because it's not signed by me. (no requirement for a signature). CMP isn't the delivering dealer either, the FFL is...but they wont ship until you have a signed certificate submitted to them.

Other dealers will direct people to classes that you pay for (or they charge for). Some even stole our material 100% and charged for it.

Many dealers wouldn't take our class certificate for 1639, said it didn't meet the requirements. Eventually most gave in and accepted it, I heard North40 still wont take it. Don't know about the 1143 certificate yet.

King County sheriff's office asked me to change the 1639 certificate, because it said bad things about the law. I questioned why they cared, they did not have to see or certify it, they said because they were telling deputies and staff to take our class

Over 21,000 have completed the free class thus far.

 

[Sporting Systems]

I don't see anything in the above that says I cannot buy a long gun in Post Falls, ID and walk out the door with it sa

I don't see anything in the above that says I cannot buy a long gun in Post Falls, ID and walk out the door with it same day.

In addition, a licensee may sell a rifle or shotgun to a person who is not a resident of the state where the licensee's business premises is located in an over–the–counter transaction, provided the transaction complies with state law in the state where the licensee is located and in the state where the purchaser resides

@arakboss posted it....the previous paragraph, not the latter, I've clipped it here...

 

[gmerkt]

Is there an exhaustive list of items that will serve as proof of the training requirement?

See post 23, above. To proceed to their site:

Free HB-1143/I-1639 Firearms Safety Training Program

Get WA firearm safety certified (HB1143) online & for FREE. Easy, convenient, legal solution. Get started right now! Sporting Systems Firearms and Ammo.

sporting-systems.com

I got mine there about a week ago. My FFL is the one who referred me. But a few years earlier, I got the one for semi-auto rifles. That one worked for me.

 

[gmerkt]

What's funny, no funny is the lengths some dealers, will go to to make it harder....

CMP won't take our class certificate for CMP sales, because it's not signed by me. (no requirement for a signature). CMP isn't the delivering dealer either, the FFL is...but they wont ship until you have a signed certificate submitted to them.

Other dealers will direct people to classes that you pay for (or they charge for). Some even stole our material 100% and charged for it.

Many dealers wouldn't take our class certificate for 1639, said it didn't meet the requirements. Eventually most gave in and accepted it, I heard North40 still wont take it. Don't know about the 1143 certificate yet.

The thing is, the language of the law is official. It's up to the state AG's office to clarify it and if necessary, enforce provisions therein. Which in any case would be a huge undertaking to do comprehensively. My FFL says he's going to look at the certificate once, next time I come in for a transaction, he's not going to ask. He isn't going to keep them on file. The law requires that the certificate holder retain it, not the dealer. So mine says, anyway.

The CMP's approach is purely self-defensive. They aren't going to take any chances so they are imposing their own restrictions. Which is their right, but total horse manure.

I can see why certain dealers might impose the need to take a hands-on course to buy through their store. There might be a financial incentive for them to do so if a fee is involved. Scoundrels.

Now we have the potential next round of "training" coming up this legislative session. Which, if enacted as proposed, will entail hands on safety training. That augers to be a gold mine for those doing the training, once it gets sorted out.

 

[gmerkt]

posted it....the previous paragraph, not the latter, I've clipped it here...

"...provided the transaction complies with state law in the state where the licensee is located and in the state where the purchaser resides"

This is circular language, considering the out-of-state purchase provisions do not specifically prohibit it. Meaning, since it doesn't say I can't do it, therefore I'm in compliance with the law. Or something like that.

 

[gmerkt]

I think the safety course requirements of I-1639 were something of a sop to the anti-gun crowd. Said another way, a feel good measure. On the other hand, a real, hands on course, such as contemplated for this leg. session might have a bit of real effect. Meaning, if somebody who can't handle a firearm safely can't pass the course, he cannot buy one. There are a few people out there who fall into this category. So to the extent of this result, such a law might have effect. Whether it may result in the saving of a life or lives is impossible to know.

There was another provision of I-1639 that so far hasn't panned out. The part that says:

"The DOL must develop a process to verify that persons who have acquired pistols or semiautomatic assault rifles remain eligible to possess firearms, and if a person is no longer eligible, to notify the local law enforcement agency and take steps to ensure the person is not illegally in possession of firearms. The DOL must work with the Washington State Patrol and other law enforcement agencies and may consult with public and private sector individuals to accomplish this task."

This has never happened. Because the State of Warshington can't afford to do it. Yes, the voters passed it. No, the state isn't doing it. But it gave voters a dose of good feeling when they marked their ballots.

Four years later, voter-approved WA gun law hasn't been implemented

State officials have yet to start annual background checks for owners of pistols and semiautomatic rifles — and they have no concrete plans to do so.

crosscut.com

 

[Bearskinner]

I have a couple buddy's that work at Cabela's in post falls, Idaho. As of 01/01/2024, any firearm that could be previously purchased over the counter, from a Washington individual, must sit on the shelf for the required 10 business days (14, including weekends) other states are required to comply with requirements from the buyers home state. Handguns etc, must still be transferred to a Washington State FFL, and Wa staters must do the paperwork in Washington, and your firearm sits in Washington purgatory for the required waiting period. I must say, I'm glad I live in Idaho.

 

[Sporting Systems]

I think the safety course requirements of I-1639 were something of a sop to the anti-gun crowd. Said another way, a feel good measure. On the other hand, a real, hands on course, such as contemplated for this leg. session might have a bit of real effect. Meaning, if somebody who can't handle a firearm safely can't pass the course, he cannot buy one. There are a few people out there who fall into this category. So to the extent of this result, such a law might have effect. Whether it may result in the saving of a life or lives is impossible to know.

The anti gunners wrote the actual law as passed on the initiative. More expensive mandatory training will just price more people out of the market and create additional delays in people being able to obtain a firearm for any lawful purpose. This has been declared unconstitutional in several states already.

There was another provision of I-1639 that so far hasn't panned out. The part that says:

"The DOL must develop a process to verify that persons who have acquired pistols or semiautomatic assault rifles remain eligible to possess firearms, and if a person is no longer eligible, to notify the local law enforcement agency and take steps to ensure the person is not illegally in possession of firearms. The DOL must work with the Washington State Patrol and other law enforcement agencies and may consult with public and private sector individuals to accomplish this task."

This has never happened. Because the State of Washington can't afford to do it. Yes, the voters passed it. No, the state isn't doing it. But it gave voters a dose of good feeling when they marked their ballots.

Four years later, voter-approved WA gun law hasn't been implemented

State officials have yet to start annual background checks for owners of pistols and semiautomatic rifles — and they have no concrete plans to do so.

crosscut.com

They're trying too, but are running into funding issues, and other logistics (use of NICS system) and checking on people who are dead, moved, or don't own a firearm anymore. It keeps coming back around in the WSP reports. Yes, it sounded good on the ballot to the gun grabbers and those without a knowledge of our Constitution.