|
|
|
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:03 am
|
Forum rules
Nothing contained in this section shall be construed as legal advice. All members and guests are advised to perform due diligence in regards to laws and legal actions.
Author |
Message |
robmill70
Location: Graham-ish Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 Posts: 108
Real Name: Robert Miller
|
What's the rule for selling stripped lowers.....have to go through an FFL? As I read 594, it says firearms.....anyone else have anything?
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:25 pm |
|
|
Pvanderzee
Site Supporter
Location: Bow Joined: Tue Apr 2, 2013 Posts: 2688
Real Name: Phill
|
robmill70 wrote: What's the rule for selling stripped lowers.....have to go through an FFL? As I read 594, it says firearms.....anyone else have anything? 9.41.010 wrote: (11) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder. "Firearm" does not include a flare gun or other pyrotechnic visual distress signaling device, or a powder-actuated tool or other device designed solely to be used for construction purposes. If you can't fire a round from it, it is not a "firearm" as defined by WA R.C.W. 9.41.010. This differs from the Federal definition of a "firearm," but we're talking about WA R.C.W.'s, not Federal CFR's.
_________________Sinus211 wrote: Z66 and I still fuck on the regular. zombie66 wrote: Mikey is a Bossy Bottom.....
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:28 pm |
|
|
robmill70
Location: Graham-ish Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 Posts: 108
Real Name: Robert Miller
|
poking around.... it says "in whole or part" though.....
CW 9.41.113 Firearm sales or transfers—Background checks—Requirements—Exceptions. (1) All firearm sales or transfers, in whole or part in this state including without limitation a sale or transfer where either the purchaser or seller or transferee or transferor is in Washington, shall be subject to background checks unless specifically exempted by state or federal law. The background check requirement applies to all sales or transfers including, but not limited to, sales and transfers through a licensed dealer, at gun shows, online, and between unlicensed persons.
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:34 pm |
|
|
Pvanderzee
Site Supporter
Location: Bow Joined: Tue Apr 2, 2013 Posts: 2688
Real Name: Phill
|
robmill70 wrote: poking around.... it says "in whole or part" though.....
CW 9.41.113 Firearm sales or transfers—Background checks—Requirements—Exceptions. (1) All firearm sales or transfers, in whole or part in this state including without limitation a sale or transfer where either the purchaser or seller or transferee or transferor is in Washington, shall be subject to background checks unless specifically exempted by state or federal law. The background check requirement applies to all sales or transfers including, but not limited to, sales and transfers through a licensed dealer, at gun shows, online, and between unlicensed persons. Do barrels require a background check? Gas blocks? Triggers? Negative. We're not talking about a part of the gun. "In whole or in part" refers to the firearm sale or transfer, not the firearm itself. The action of transferring a firearm is regulated. Example, I buy a gun from out of state, and it comes to my FFL in state. That transfer was "in part" in this state. The firearm itself is not being regulated by 9.41.113. The act of transferring the firearm is what is being regulated. Which brings us back to 9.41.010, which gives a definition of what a "firearm" actually is. If the object being sold or transferred is not a "firearm" as defined by 9.41.010, then a "Firearm sale or transfer" has not taken place.
_________________Sinus211 wrote: Z66 and I still fuck on the regular. zombie66 wrote: Mikey is a Bossy Bottom.....
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:36 pm |
|
|
MadPick
Site Admin
Location: Renton, WA Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 Posts: 51919
Real Name: Steve
|
Phill for the win! Shoulda been a lawyer, man.
_________________SteveBenefactor Life Member, National Rifle AssociationLife Member, Second Amendment FoundationPatriot & Life Member, Gun Owners of AmericaLife Member, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear ArmsLegal Action Supporter, Firearms Policy CoalitionMember, NAGR/NFGRPlease support the organizations that support all of us.Leave it cleaner than you found it.
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 6:37 pm |
|
|
os2firefox
Site Supporter
Location: Everett, WA Joined: Sat Aug 4, 2012 Posts: 2798
Real Name: Snek on de ladder
|
Pvanderzee wrote: This differs from the Federal definition of a "firearm," but we're talking about WA R.C.W.'s, not Federal CFR's. Does a stripped lower meet the federal definition of a firearm receiver?
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 6:58 pm |
|
|
scrid2000
Site Supporter
Location: Pierce County Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2018 Posts: 1980
Real Name: Shane
|
robmill70 wrote: poking around.... it says "in whole or part" though..... Yes. If any part of the sale of a firearm takes place in Washington, a background check is required. os2firefox wrote: Pvanderzee wrote: This differs from the Federal definition of a "firearm," but we're talking about WA R.C.W.'s, not Federal CFR's. Does a stripped lower meet the federal definition of a firearm receiver? Yes, but federal law is not at issue here. The state could adopt the federal definition of a firearm, but they haven't. So for state law, we look only at state statutes.
_________________ Posts not legal advice.
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 7:04 pm |
|
|
Guns4Liberty
Site Supporter
Location: Lynnwood/Bothell Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 Posts: 8552
Real Name: Curtis
|
os2firefox wrote: Pvanderzee wrote: This differs from the Federal definition of a "firearm," but we're talking about WA R.C.W.'s, not Federal CFR's. Does a stripped lower meet the federal definition of a firearm receiver? I've seen it argued that it doesn't. For those who are curious, read this page and decide for yourself: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-g ... e%20device. It's all about the conjunctions, baby. As for the OP's question, Phil nailed it.
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:27 pm |
|
|
Pvanderzee
Site Supporter
Location: Bow Joined: Tue Apr 2, 2013 Posts: 2688
Real Name: Phill
|
MadPick wrote: Phill for the win! Shoulda been a lawyer, man. I wouldn't be able to stand the other lawyers, but my English teachers would be proud. I failed every single high school English class I took. It's not that I'm bad at reading or writing. My teachers and classes were just boring as all hell. The kids who get 'A's in welding and metal fab don't get 'A's in creative writing.
_________________Sinus211 wrote: Z66 and I still fuck on the regular. zombie66 wrote: Mikey is a Bossy Bottom.....
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:32 pm |
|
|
Traut
Site Supporter
Location: Downtown Newcastle Joined: Sat Mar 5, 2016 Posts: 3440
Real Name: Traut
|
Pvanderzee wrote: The kids who get 'A's in welding and metal fab don't get 'A's in creative writing. Some did, but it was loooong time ago when there weren't so many words.
_________________ I always thought growing old would take a lot longer.....
So, when does that "Old enough to know better" shit kick in??? I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible, but pissing everyone off is a piece of cake.
|
Fri Nov 27, 2020 9:49 pm |
|
|
Yondering
Site Supporter
Location: Skagit County, in the woods Joined: Tue Apr 7, 2015 Posts: 1058
|
Pvanderzee wrote: MadPick wrote: Phill for the win! Shoulda been a lawyer, man. I wouldn't be able to stand the other lawyers, but my English teachers would be proud. I failed every single high school English class I took. It's not that I'm bad at reading or writing. My teachers and classes were just boring as all hell. The kids who get 'A's in welding and metal fab don't get 'A's in creative writing.Well, most of them anyway. That drove my wife (then girlfriend) nuts because I also hated English and writing classes and thought the teachers were boring, but didn't have to work at them either. A good teacher makes all the difference! I had one good teacher in that subject before high school, and that was enough to get me through so I could focus on auto shop, lol. Regardless - your reasoning is solid and right on target. A receiver by itself is not a firearm under the jurisdiction of I594. The federal definition is irrelevant in this context as you said. FWIW I know of a couple FFL dealers who insist on transferring receivers as complete firearms (rifle or pistol, rather than "other", complete AR15 lowers are one example), but I refuse to buy one from them because of it. We don't need any extra self-imposed rules like that.
Last edited by Yondering on Sat Nov 28, 2020 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
Sat Nov 28, 2020 1:58 am |
|
|
Guns4Liberty
Site Supporter
Location: Lynnwood/Bothell Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 Posts: 8552
Real Name: Curtis
|
Yondering wrote: FWIW I know of a couple FFL dealers who insist on doing transfers on receivers, but I refuse to buy one from them because of it. We don't need any extra self-imposed rules like that. To be fair, FFLs are required to follow that protocol by the feds, assuming it's their inventory you're talking about, so their hands are tied. But if two guys walk in and want a private transfer for a stripped lower per 594, the dealer should just send them out to the parking lot to do the deal privately. But when there's money in it for the FFL, it's not hard to see why they wouldn't do that.
|
Sat Nov 28, 2020 7:52 am |
|
|
Yondering
Site Supporter
Location: Skagit County, in the woods Joined: Tue Apr 7, 2015 Posts: 1058
|
Guns4Liberty wrote: Yondering wrote: FWIW I know of a couple FFL dealers who insist on doing transfers on receivers, but I refuse to buy one from them because of it. We don't need any extra self-imposed rules like that. To be fair, FFLs are required to follow that protocol by the feds, assuming it's their inventory you're talking about, so their hands are tied. But if two guys walk in and want a private transfer for a stripped lower per 594, the dealer should just send them out to the parking lot to do the deal privately. But when there's money in it for the FFL, it's not hard to see why they wouldn't do that. Sorry I should have worded that better. I know a couple FFL dealers who insist on transferring receivers as a rifle or pistol (rather than "other", as they should), and doing 1639-relevant paperwork on them. I won't shop with those guys. I have no problem with dealers transferring receivers as "other", as they should, with no waiting periods, nothing to do with 1639, etc. I don't expect them to sell them without any paperwork, as my pre-edit post appeared to say; I usually proof read my posts but that one slipped by.
|
Sat Nov 28, 2020 6:39 pm |
|
|
robmill70
Location: Graham-ish Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 Posts: 108
Real Name: Robert Miller
|
So if I take the slide off of a pistol and sell the lower I'm good? I ask that a bit tongue in cheek because I don't think we can do that anymore. I decided yo play it safe and transfer some lowers through an FFL.
|
Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:12 pm |
|
|
Pvanderzee
Site Supporter
Location: Bow Joined: Tue Apr 2, 2013 Posts: 2688
Real Name: Phill
|
robmill70 wrote: So if I take the slide off of a pistol and sell the lower I'm good? Sure. Selling the lower off by itself would mean that the item you are transferring likely does not meet the definition of a "firearm" in RCW 9.41.010. Until the WA legislature expands that definition, that won't change.
_________________Sinus211 wrote: Z66 and I still fuck on the regular. zombie66 wrote: Mikey is a Bossy Bottom.....
|
Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:16 pm |
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: jukk0u, Scarpia and 41 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|