Washington Washington State Law Regarding Out Of State Purchases

[arakboss]

I was looking in to WA State law regarding firearm transfers and found this law regarding out of state firearm purchases:

Out of State Purchasing (RCW 9.41.122)Residents of Washington may purchase rifles and shotguns in a state other than Washington from a federally licensed dealer. For internet sales and the purchase of a pistol out of state, residents are subject to procedures and background checks required by Washington law. Procedurally, this requires purchase of the firearm from a federally licensed dealer and shipment to a licensed Washington dealer who will conduct the necessary background checks before transfer of ownership to the purchaser.

Source: http://leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/LAW/Documents/Washington Firearms Laws.pdf (see page 9)

Note that this law does not subject WA residents purchasing a rifle or shotgun to procedures and background checks required by Washington law unless it's an internet sale. Did I-1639 have specific language requiring out of state dealers to do otherwise?

Read More

 

[User 1234]

That is not the actual law, that is some legislative staffer's summary of the legal topic. Federal law requires residents to purchase pistols and frames (including AR lowers) from an FFL dealer in their state of residence. Federal law also requires FFL dealers selling long guns to a non-resident to honor and follow the purchaser's home state laws and the FFL dealer's state laws. This is why California residents (with extremely narrow exceptions) can't buy any gun from an FFL dealer outside California, California law doesn't allow it, and federal law requires the dealer (in every state) to apply the purchaser's home state laws for that purchase.

 

[arakboss]

That is not the actual law, that is some legislative staffer's summary of the legal topic. Federal law requires residents to purchase pistols and frames (including AR lowers) from an FFL dealer in their state of residence. Federal law also requires FFL dealers selling long guns to a non-resident to honor and follow the purchaser's home state laws and the FFL dealer's state laws. This is why California residents (with extremely narrow exceptions) can't buy any gun from an FFL dealer outside California, California law doesn't allow it, and federal law requires the dealer (in every state) to apply the purchaser's home state laws for that purchase.

My bad this might be the actual law:

RCW 9.41.122
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.
[2015 c 1 § 6 (Initiative Measure No. 594, approved November 4, 2014); 1970 ex.s. c 74 § 1. Formerly RCW 19.70.010.]

 

[User 1234]

I think your question is whether 1639 applies to a Washington resident's purchase of a rifle at an out of state FFL dealer if no part of the transaction involves the internet. Keep in mind that even if a purchaser would have a arguable defense to any prosecution, there aren't any guarantees how a court would rule. Also FFL dealers in other states would likely not want to take any chances and would likely refuse to sell any semi-auto rifles to WA residents. When ATF agents audit their books it could raise questions. Also keep in mind that the anti-gun politicians' staff members read these message boards.

 

[arakboss]

That is not the actual law, that is some legislative staffer's summary of the legal topic. Federal law requires residents to purchase pistols and frames (including AR lowers) from an FFL dealer in their state of residence. Federal law also requires FFL dealers selling long guns to a non-resident to honor and follow the purchaser's home state laws and the FFL dealer's state laws. This is why California residents (with extremely narrow exceptions) can't buy any gun from an FFL dealer outside California, California law doesn't allow it, and federal law requires the dealer (in every state) to apply the purchaser's home state laws for that purchase.

I corrected the law link in my first reply to you. My question is since all Oregon FFL dealers are required by Feds to follow all WA laws regarding firearm transfers, why did WA feel it necessary to state that it was necessary for interenet sales, pistols and any firearm transfer that when any part of the transaction took place in WA?

 

[Stomper]

The entire concept is stupid. That's the same as prohibiting someone who's from a state where gambling and prostitution are ABSOLUTELY prohibited from going into a Las Vegas casino to gamble, or going to the Bunny Ranch for a...... uh, manicure.

 

[arakboss]

The entire concept is stupid. That's the same as prohibiting someone who's from a state where gambling and prostitution are ABSOLUTELY prohibited from going into a Las Vegas casino to gamble, or going to the Bunny Ranch for a...... uh, manicure.

Agreed but there didn't seem to be any need based on Federal law to distinguish between rifles/shotguns and this "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."
Fed rules should have required all firearm transfers by OR dealers to WA residents to be subject to WA State transfer procedures.

 

[arakboss]

Agreed but there didn't seem to be any need based on Federal law to distinguish between rifles/shotguns and this "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."
Fed rules should have required all firearm transfers by OR dealers to WA residents to be subject to WA State transfer procedures.

Unless WA was giving Oregon permission to transfer rifles and shotguns based on Oregon transfer procedures 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:

This is what has been happening for years (prior to I-1639) with WA residents who came down to Oregon and purchased a rilfe or shotgun. They were not subject to all the same WA procedures and laws regarding purchasing and transferring a firearm.

 

[Stomper]

Another thing I just thought of. Say a WA resident maintains another property that they "snowbird" to in AZ for three months, and said WA resident wants to purchase and use an AR in AZ (say an AR and a machinegun outlawed in WA), and has them securely maintained and stored in/on their AZ property....

WA should suck it.... This seems to be grounds for a Federal lawsuit to me.

 

[arakboss]

Another thing I just thought of. Say a WA resident maintains another property that they "snowbird" to in AZ for three months, and said WA resident wants to purchase and use an AR in AZ (and say and machinegun outlawed in WA), and has them securely maintained and stored in/on their AZ property....

WA should suck it.... This seems to be grounds for a Federal lawsuit to me.

If Oregon FFL dealers were subject to following "all" procedures and laws of WA State and OR State, they should have been running the NICS checks as WA required (directly) and as Oregon required (through State Police) and they should have been collecting WA State sales tax. I am pretty sure that would be a legal no no for WA FFL to sell a firearm to a buyer with out collecting the sales tax on it. Why were OR dealers allowed to do that avoid that law?. It seems like there is a little bit of wiggle room in these laws the Feds are requiring to be followed by out of state dealers?

 

[User 1234]

May a person who resides in one state and owns property in another state purchase a firearm in either state? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

If a person maintains a home in two states and resides in both states for certain periods of the year, they may, during the period of time they actually reside in a particular state, purchase a firearm in that state. However, simply owning property in another state does not alone qualify the...

www.atf.gov

 

[TCOV]

RCW 9.41.122 is WA law and clearly allows a non prohibited WA resident to purchase a long gun from a FFL in another state and no mention of semi auto restrictions. A WA resident under 21 would not be able to buy a semi auto in another state as they are prohibited from buying a semi auto in WA state. This RCW covers the federal requirement to follow WA law by the out of state FFL. I understand that some out of state FFLs still won't sell a long gun to a WA resident but that's on them and not illegal under fed or state law.

 

[arakboss]

RCW 9.41.122 is WA law and clearly allows a non prohibited WA resident to purchase a long gun from a FFL in another state and no mention of semi auto restrictions. A WA resident under 21 would not be able to buy a semi auto in another state as they are prohibited from buying a semi auto in WA state. This RCW covers the federal requirement to follow WA law by the out of state FFL. I understand that some out of state FFLs still won't sell a long gun to a WA resident but that's on them and not illegal under fed or state law.

That is what I was hoping but your opinion is not widely shared.

 

[User 1234]

RCW 9.41.122 is WA law and clearly allows a non prohibited WA resident to purchase a long gun from a FFL in another state and no mention of semi auto restrictions. A WA resident under 21 would not be able to buy a semi auto in another state as they are prohibited from buying a semi auto in WA state. This RCW covers the federal requirement to follow WA law by the out of state FFL. I understand that some out of state FFLs still won't sell a long gun to a WA resident but that's on them and not illegal under fed or state law.

There are additional provisions in 9.41 which cause problems and uncertainties. I am not going to share my analysis of them here so that the anti-gun legislative staffers can read it and try to ban more legal transactions.

 

[TCOV]

That is what I was hoping but your opinion is not widely shared.

Some people don't realize RCWs are state law and let their fears and "what ifs" run wild. I1639 did not mention RCW 9.41.122 and made no changes so it is still the law.

 

[SCARed]

Numerous oregon FFLs will sell to WA residents. The FFL I frequent which is one of the larger ones in the PDX area, and a supporter of this site, has told me the ATF considers everything as business as usual with regards to WA residents. As far as they are concerned, nothing changed when WA implemented their law.

 

[TCOV]

Numerous oregon FFLs will sell to WA residents. The FFL I frequent which is one of the larger ones in the PDX area, and a supporter of this site, has told me the ATF considers everything as business as usual with regards to WA residents. As far as they are concerned, nothing changed when WA implemented their law.

I am glad to hear that. Nothing did change except the 21 age limit for semi auto purchase.

 

[Alexx1401]

Another thing I just thought of. Say a WA resident maintains another property that they "snowbird" to in AZ for three months, and said WA resident wants to purchase and use an AR in AZ (say an AR and a machinegun outlawed in WA), and has them securely maintained and stored in/on their AZ property....

WA should suck it.... This seems to be grounds for a Federal lawsuit to me.

It used to be, may still be, dependent on residency. I was born here, moved to AZ first time in the 60's. From that time on I tended to bounce back and forth. As soon as I turned 21 I got a WA CPL. I kept it valid even when back in AZ. For a good while I had a drivers license in both states. I was told I was not supposed to do this but back then they did not seem to catch it. Suspect now days with the net they would. I liked that when I was here in WA I could carry. I did at one time buy a machine gun in AZ. When I came up here I had to of course leave it there. The entire time I was buying guns in both states using that states ID. Again I doubt you could get away with this now days. Suspect "residency" must be somehow defined by time maybe? Not a lawyer of course so don't know if you can be legally a resident of a couple states at the same time??