WA State Alien Firearms Licenses Part II


PDA






MD_Willington
January 8, 2009, 07:58 PM
Here we go again...

WA State LPRs and all other WA State residents for that matter, check in...

Tune in to this:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1052&year=2009

Find Your Legislator
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx

Please contact them and urge them to support

HB 1052 - 2009-10

This will reinstate issuing of the AFL to non-immigrant aliens

AND aparently

Drop the requirement for LPRs aka Green Card Holders... as the license is a violation of your 14th and 2nd A rights guaranteed to you once you obtained your Green Card.

Thank you for your time...


PS theres's a catch...

This was veteod last year...


And it is coming quicker than you think...

Jan 15 2009 Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Judiciary at 10:00 AM in anticipation of other legislative action.


!!! GO GO GO !!!

If you enjoyed reading about "WA State Alien Firearms Licenses Part II" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MD_Willington
January 9, 2009, 02:07 PM
RE HB1052 support...


Matt,

Senator Schoesler asked me to let you know that he will be a strong "YES" vote on this issue if it comes to the floor for consideration this session. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

Krista Winters
Legislative Aide to
Senator Mark Schoesler

MD_Willington
January 12, 2009, 05:15 PM
More replies:



Yes – I have worked with Rep. Blake and Moeller to get this to work. I do not expect this to be a problem.

Ross



Matt,
I just noticed that HB 1052 has been introduced this year regarding alien firearms. Could you please take a look at it and let me know if it resolves your issues? If you agree, I would consider co-sponsoring the bill.

Thanks,
Joe Schmick
State Representative

MD_Willington
January 14, 2009, 08:55 PM
Contact these people and ask them to support HB1052

House Committee on Judiciary members and contact information:

Representative Steve Kirby
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7996
Kirby.Steve@leg.wa.gov

Representative Dennis Flannigan
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7930
Flannigan.Dennis@leg.wa.gov

Representative Timm Ormsby
Democrat
Spokane
(360) 786-7946
Ormsby.Timm@leg.wa.gov

Representative Jay Rodne
Republican
North Bend
(360) 786-7852
Rodne.Jay@leg.wa.gov

Representative Mary Helen Roberts
Democrat
Lynnwood
(360) 786-7950
Roberts.MaryHelen@leg.wa.gov

Representative Roger Goodman
Democrat
Kirkland
(360) 786-7878
Goodman.Roger@leg.wa.gov

Representative Troy Kelley
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7890
Kelley.Troy@leg.wa.gov

Representative Jamie Pedersen
Democrat
Seattle
(360) 786-7826
Pedersen.Jamie@leg.wa.gov

Representative Charles Ross
Republican
Naches
(360) 786-7856
Ross.Charles@leg.wa.gov

Representative Judy Warnick
Republican
Moses Lake
(360) 786-7932
Warnick.J@leg.wa.gov

Representative Matthew Shea
Republican
Mead
(360) 786-7984
Shea.Matt@leg.wa.gov

MD_Willington
January 15, 2009, 03:26 PM
Please contact them,the bill goes to them on the 22nd of January.

MD_Willington
January 16, 2009, 06:12 PM
The bill goes to a "Possible Executive Session"

The more people that contact the committee the better.

If they give it the thumbs up, then it goes to Rules...

If it gets the thumbs up there it goes to the Governor.

armedandsafe
January 17, 2009, 06:37 PM
Received this yesterday from Senator Holmquist:

Thank you for your note about House Bill 1052.


In the Senate, Senate Bill 5193 appears to be similar if not identical. Should the bill pass out of committee (I do not sit on the committee to which it was referred.), I'll keep your support of the bill in mind.


Thanks again for the note. I hope to hear from you in the future.


Sincerely,


Senator Janéa Holmquist
13th Legislative District

Should both bills pas their respective Houses, they will have to then meet in committee to be resolved and merged.

If they give it the thumbs up, then it goes to Rules...

If it gets the thumbs up there it goes to the Governor.

I thought it would then go to the Senate, rather than straight from the House to the Governor.

Pops

Gungnir
January 17, 2009, 11:23 PM
Hmm...

I read the wording in SB 5195 and it seemed that it was focused on hunting.


AN ACT Relating to weapons possession by an alien when hunting with a Washington-licensed hunter; and amending RCW 9.41.170.


(5) This section shall not apply to a nonimmigrant alien who is carrying or possessing weapons for the purpose of using them in the hunting of game while such person is in the act of hunting, or while on a hunting trip, while accompanied by a nondeferred Washington-licensed hunter who has held a Washington hunting license for the prior three years and is over eighteen years of age. Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow aliens to hunt or fish in this state without first having obtained a nonresident hunting or fishing license. For the purposes of this subsection, "accompanied" means to go along with another person while staying within a range of the other person that permits continual unaided visual and auditory communication.

The sections between relate to the AFL as currently defined in RCW 9.41.170 (maybe the state senate haven't heard that since the DOL aren't happy with a WSP supplied summary, the FBI stopped sending background checks for ALF's to WSP). However it STILL contravenes the 2A, since there is no clause for RKBA for other than hunting, this might wind up being more restrictive than the current law.

There's also language that states in the clause I added that an ALIEN (regardless of status I assume since it doesn't clarify) needs a NON-RESIDENT hunting license, how very 21st century of them, I guess this is because a nonresident license is more expensive, but I also object that according to this bill, I'm classified as a nonresident of Washington State, obviously for the purposes of price gouging, which could be seen as taxation without representation.

You know, I suspect that by the time this is all sorted out, I'll have retired to Alaska, and surviving out on my Land. Or a US Citizen, or perhaps both in any of these cases this issue I have disappears.

MD_Willington
January 18, 2009, 09:56 PM
Yeah I'll probably be sworn in too before this is sorted out...

Pops, you probably know more about the steps than I do..

Anyway, I have my people people on speed dial and she'll keep me updated on HB1052

Otherwise we can only hope the NRA lawsuit gets us to where we want to be if these bills get dropped.

waverace
January 20, 2009, 06:32 PM
:D Hey guys well it seems like 1052 will be the ticket us LPR's need , about time .
havent been on the forum for a while but will be checking in more reguarly from now on to keep up with this , MD keep up the good work , I'm keeping my fingers crossed on my left hand and keeping my trigger finger supple on the right :) my local dealer has a really nice mosin carbine that I'd like to buy as a late xmas gift to myself , lets hope its still there when it gets sorted .
Will be interesting to see the flood of gun sales if this passes .

MD_Willington
January 20, 2009, 08:05 PM
eh crap... received this today


This bill was pulled from the hearing schedule.
I need to call on it and find out what that means and why.
Main thing is it is very early in session, so we have lots of time.
Give me until tomorrow to figure this one out.



BOOO

carnaby
January 20, 2009, 08:19 PM
This was veteod last year...

So it went to the governor and she vetoed it?

waverace
January 20, 2009, 08:26 PM
do they not realise that if this isnt put right , then the NRA are gonna bust it completely , or at least they are gonna try .:banghead::cuss: so whats happening with that law suit ? from what I understand that was put in back in november .

Gungnir
January 20, 2009, 08:43 PM
Yep, if the AFL is considered illegal by the federal court then WA State could be in some trouble.

Consider, loss of earnings, and punitive damages from class action lawsuits, I wonder whether anyone has been deported for contravening RCW 9.41.170 what damage did that cause them, in property loss, loss of earnings etc. not to mention damage inflicted. For those not directly impacted by contravening then there is still a case that they have had their rights impinged for a number of years, and this could lead to punitive damages.

IANAL but I can talk to one if the NRA win this suit and see what the position would be on trying this.

Gungnir
January 20, 2009, 09:12 PM
Just received this from Jim Moeller

Hi:
The executive session has been delayed to take advantage of another opportunity to group the bill with another. I have assurance from the chair that the bill will be exec from committee. Thanks for your
interest.

-jm

MD_Willington
January 20, 2009, 09:37 PM
Ah, that sounds better Gungnir...

The plaintiffs in the NRA suit are possibly going to lose employment, personal property, the ability to stay in the USA & become a US citizen or all 3 of those combined.

As you're probably aware, a lot of LPR's are married to a US citizen, and may have children, born in the US, that are US citizens. By removing the firearms, the State would be denying those firearms to both the LPR and the US citizen spouse and or children who may also be US citizens.

That would be what 3 violations, 14th, 2nd and 4th..

14th - Equal protection

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


2nd - Right to bear arms.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


4th - Property confiscation

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Gungnir
January 20, 2009, 09:56 PM
Yeah, I sent a message back, explaining my concern after similar incidences in previous sessions :)

Yes, you're right on the counts, my Immigration Attorney demanded my wife's gun collection be locked in a safe or safe area that I do not have the key or combination to, and that under no circumstances should she have any weapon unlocked while I was present (so no "just in case" shotgun under the bed), until I can obtain an AFL. I quoted the 14th and 2nd at him, and explained that he was requesting that a US Citizen voluntarily suspend their 2nd amendment rights and self defense rights, for my safety, to which he said he didn't agree either, but that was WA for you. Actual or constructive possession was his concern.

But we'll see what happens, I think that SB5195 and HB1052 will be merged, I'm just not that happy with the wording of SB5195, since it still requires an AFL for anything but hunting. But if they repeal RCW 9.41.170 for LPRs, and then add section 5 of SB5195 I'd be happier.

MD_Willington
January 21, 2009, 01:52 PM
Just wanted to correct the State Bill

it is SB5193

PBinWA
January 21, 2009, 02:30 PM
Thanks for your work MD!

Email sent to my Senators and Reps.

waverace
January 22, 2009, 03:47 AM
looks like HB 1052 is going in on the 29th (subject to change)
http://www.leg.wa.gov/Legislature/_templates/CommitteeAgendas.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID=%7bA0C0D95E-FD59-4C30-B198-F0335080286A%7d&NRORIGINALURL=%2fHouse%2fCommittees%2fJUDI%2fagendas%2ehtm&NRCACHEHINT=Guest

Gungnir
January 22, 2009, 11:11 AM
Does anyone have a link for the NRA/SAF court filing, and findings?

I've dug through the WA court system for this and can't find it.

TIA

waverace
January 22, 2009, 11:28 AM
I couldnt find anything on it either , maybe it wasnt filed in WA state , does anyone have an insider in the NRA or SAF that could keep us posted on this ?

MD_Willington
January 22, 2009, 03:52 PM
PM me you email addresses.. I have the a load of PDFs on the case.

MD_Willington
January 23, 2009, 12:06 PM
Email sent

waverace
January 26, 2009, 12:04 AM
its very quiet in here , are you all holding your breath :what:. I wouldnt recommend it :rolleyes:

MD_Willington
January 26, 2009, 12:54 AM
#1 Judge sided with first NRA case, injunction issued, now judge needs to sign it, and DOL need to "get off the pot" maybe literally on that one.. ya never know.

#2 HB1052 to be heard Jan 29, sounds good so far, I've been called by most of the Judiciary members or their underlings, they want it done ASAP

#3 NRA case 2 is in August, sees if WA will drop LPR's requirement for AFL, as it is a breach of 14th amendment, as LPRs are "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"...


Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

waverace
January 26, 2009, 01:56 AM
I'm afraid the last 6 years of dealing with government agencies has made me a little soft in the head , I was under the mistaken impression that I had the right to defend myself and my family , that I had the right to partake in any legal sport of my choice and to collect as a hobby any legal historical artifacts of my choice , obviously according to WA state this is not the case and I am to be a good sheep and accept what I am told , without question and must roll over and expose my under belly for any and all attacks that I might have the fortune to recieve , and be thankfull for it .
uhhhhh , HELL NO ! :neener:

Gungnir
January 26, 2009, 02:03 AM
Makes me wonder what the legal situation would be if a LPR shot an intruder in self defense (if their spouse was a US Citizen and had the right to own firearms in WA).

Would they be automatically in breach of the RCW? Would they be cleared of any issue since the shooting was in Self Defense? How would WA apply the RCW?

These are things I ponder while waiting for the Judge to sign the damn injunction.

waverace
January 26, 2009, 02:19 AM
As a non citizen they would be illegally in posession of a firearm , class c felony , deportation ! same thing goes for asking to see a gun at a gun store or gun show , as soon as it is picked up , illegal posession , same at the range , if a friend says here have a go , as soon as it is touched , illegal posession .
The one guy in the NRA case that works in the gun store , if he were to continue to work there just being behind the counter would be constructive posession , even if he didnt actualy touch a gun he has access to them .
If an LPR is married to a US citizen the citizen has to keep any firearms locked away with no access to the LPR what so ever , dont know how this works for cleaning after a range session , maybe they have to wait till the LPR is out of the house .
No matter which case you look at it doesnt make a lot of sense when the LPR is a law abiding member of his or her community , you are basicly treated the same as a convicted criminal without the luxury of a trial . you are prejudged to be a danger to the community .

Gungnir
January 26, 2009, 02:39 AM
Ah, so in that case, you are correct, should an intruder come to my house, I'm expected to flash them my underbelly and just concede.

However the thing I really ponder, about the law, if the law is illegal and while no expert I certainly suspect it is, then does breaking it constitute an illegal act?

waverace
January 26, 2009, 02:54 AM
To be honest I dont know , I havent found any cases where anyone has been charged with this as a stand alone case , only a couple of cases where it has been added onto a drug charge or something similar , I suspect that the majority of gun owners especially LPR's , as we knew all along are law abiding , responsible people that dont draw attention to themselves , LPR's have more to lose than most "citizens" and as such will not normally cause trouble .

waverace
January 26, 2009, 03:00 AM
One part of me would love to get my local sheriff to charge me with it just to test the water , but knowing my luck I would get convicted and shipped out in double time without even making the back page .

Gungnir
January 26, 2009, 03:07 AM
Yeah, I hear you :) being a test case would not be my idea of fun.

waverace
January 26, 2009, 03:16 AM
If I had nothing to lose I would do it but I would make dang sure that I had all the guys from THR and the NRA sitting behind me .

cdninusa
January 26, 2009, 04:05 PM
recent lurker.... now a poster. Thanks and kudos to all who run this and those who post. this site always has the most up to date information.

A couple of situations in this thread are interesting...

1. I have to wonder if a US Citizen's rights are also potentially being violated by the current WA situation..

my basis for the above is...civil rights are federal. There is no federal law preventing PRAs from possessing a firearm. Washington State has effectively applied a restriction to PRAs because, although there is a process for a PRA to obtain permission to own/possess/carry a firearm, the requirements cannot be met. This (apparently) means a US Citizen has to lock their weapons, making them difficult to access in an emergency situation.

and the million dollar question...What if there was a situation where a Citizen would have been able to protect themselves if the guns were not locked up?

2. I was told by a gun club that PRAs are allowed to shoot there (and they have many who do) but they are not allowed to take guns off the premises.

as a side note, I called DOL a few minutes ago. The lady on the phone said something should happen by March. I asked about the injunction and she said they were not aware of anything formal yet, but they were also anxious to get things solved and said they would put something up on the DOL website as soon as they received notification. She seemed genuine in her response...like she actually wanted to help.

hopefully the light at the end of the tunnel isn't just another train this time. :-)

Gungnir
January 26, 2009, 04:31 PM
Nice of you to join the party, welcome.

Interesting change in attitude from Friday, when I rang the DOL.

DOL was unaware of any possible near term changes, and refused to send me an AFL package since “they can’t issue due to a problem with the FBI background check” I explained that sending me a AFL package was not in any contravention of any laws of the state of Washington and it was my money to throw away if I so desired attempting to file for an AFL. I don’t think the DOL appreciated either the irony, or the determination, anyway the package is on the Legal thread about this issue.

As far as your point 2 is concerned...

This is a situation of active vs. constructive possession, I wouldn't trust a shooting club to know the ins and outs of my legal rights. Especially for a deportable offense. My Immigration Attorney flipped out when in my naturalization application I put the SAF and NRA down as current memberships of organizations, and gave me many instructions of what I should not do, and possible impacts if I was found to be doing them, I explained that I understood Washington Law, and that I understood what RCW 9.41.170 meant which was why I joined those organizations, which calmed him down a great deal. Fortunately my wife is the keeper of her own firearms, but locked away in (I guess) our gun safe (Common Law State) and she has the key, not I, wonder what happens should she die though (not that she's in bad health or anything).

Long and short of it, is that's my experience, bureaucracy at it's finest. Yes it suspends YOUR 2A rights as an Alien, and it also largely prevents your S.O. who might be a Citizen from the RKBA for self defense, which is why it's so stupid. It wouldn't have stood this long if it applied to any other "collective group".

Once this is cleared up, and I'm a Citizen I'll support those (State and Federal Senators and Congressmen) who supported me, and not those who did not, Gregoire for instance.

waverace
January 26, 2009, 05:05 PM
Ok I may be wrong on this BUT I am pretty sure that as an LPR we are allowed to vote for local elections , even to run for them , just not federal and of course we can never become president no matter how long we are here , that is reserved for natural borns , which is ok by me , Bill Clinton says the job sucks ! :p

cdninusa
January 26, 2009, 05:33 PM
Thanks for the welcome.

If and when I'm ever able to get a firearm, I want to make sure I fully understand the laws on use and carry (where not, when not and how not). Hopefully I'll never need to use or even mention I have it, but if the need ever comes up, I'd like to understand the laws on same beforehand.

Perhaps someone can tell me where I can get information on this? I looked through the RCW's, which mentioned there is supposed to be a handbook (published by fish and wildlife?), but I can't find anything at all. Is this publicly available or does it come with your permit along with the secret handshake?

Gungnir
January 26, 2009, 05:34 PM
:what:?

So I can vote, but not touch a gun :banghead:

ROFLMAO, if it's true then I gotta say it proves the law's an a$$

waverace
January 26, 2009, 05:38 PM
as far as I know yes you can vote for your local officials , Ill ask my lawyer about it

MD_Willington
January 26, 2009, 06:50 PM
Okay guys.. I have to be a stick in the mud here...

We need to take this discussion over to the legal section, in the other post... Other wise this one will probably get locked.

Sorry

MD

MD_Willington
January 27, 2009, 02:42 PM
Update for Canadians.

The address for the Canadian Consulate in Seattle has changed:

New Address.

Canadian Consulate General
Consular Affairs
1501 - 4th Ave., Suite 600
Seattle, WA 98101-4328

Also included are;

A sample of the refusal letter the Consular Program Officer will send to back. You should send the Consulate a copy of the letter, though I'm sure they have sent out quite a few of these.

A letter asking for a certified copy of background check from Canada.

Gungnir
January 27, 2009, 10:00 PM
Ok So the Injunction is in place, and we LPR's can get taxed to regain our 2A rights.

However remember that HB1052 is due to be read in the Judiciary on Jan 29th.

All of us should keep up the good work write to your state Senator and Congressmen, and make this stupid AFL go away forever.

While on the surface the NRA/SAF lawsuit may seem to be winning, there are no guarantee's in court. If we can pressure our Representatives in the State of Washington, so as to eliminate this case by removing the AFL requirements before it's heard, we've made a step forward in defending the 2nd Amendment.

NewWAstate
January 27, 2009, 10:41 PM
I'm a bit behind the ball here - good work all.

SAF COURT ACTION PROMPTS RESUMPTION OF WA ALIEN FIREARMS LICENSE PROGRAM
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association this week have won a preliminary injunction against the Washington State Department of Licensing that requires the state to resume processing applications by legal resident aliens for alien firearms licenses.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle also ordered that license renewals and applications sought by three individual Washington residents participating in the lawsuit also be processed. Washington is the only state in the union that requires an alien firearms license be possessed by resident aliens in order for them to have a firearm. SAF and NRA said the state law discriminates against legal resident aliens who own firearms by violating their Second Amendment rights under the equal protections affirmed by the 14th Amendment.

“We are delighted that the court has ordered a resumption of the licensing procedure, which was suspended by the state over what amounts to bureaucratic red tape,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “The State Legislature has had ample opportunity to fix what amounts to a glitch in a law that should never have existed in the first place. The people affected by the alien firearms license requirement are residents here; they are part of our community and have abided by the law.

“One of the plaintiffs works in a Bellevue gun store,” he continued. “Without a renewal of his firearms license, he would not simply lose his firearms, he would lose his job.”

The state stopped processing applications and renewals of alien firearms licenses because of a problem in running background checks. The result was that many resident aliens who had previously been issued licenses, and now possess firearms for sport, hunting and personal protection, could not get those licenses renewed. Upon expiration, these people would become “criminals on paper,” Gottlieb said, because they would be in possession of firearms without the license.

“Once again, as has happened in New Orleans, San Francisco and elsewhere, teamwork between SAF and the NRA has paid off in a sensible solution to a problem that should not exist,” Gottlieb stated. “We are confident in a final judgment and we hope this sends a signal to the Washington Legislature to fix this problem.”

MD_Willington
January 28, 2009, 01:13 PM
We still need to contact everyone on the Judiciary, and the Rules, we need them to accept 1052-2009 and get it to the "gov"...

Now at this point I'm wondering if we need to try to get media attention to the fact that we are still licensed for 2A rights...

I know I said I'm getting a new AFL but I want this whole issue gone for future LPRs as it should have been in the first place..

waverace
January 28, 2009, 01:56 PM
Hope you have better luck with the media than I did , I have a friend that works for a local newspaper, she personally is anti gun but has no problem with me owning guns , I asked her if it would be possible to ask them to run a story about our situation and she said that she would not be allowed to bring it up at work because thay are not allowed to have an oppinion , they must remain impartial on anything political , I am completely baffled by her lack of understanding that my rights are being infringed upon and that this is potentialy more widespread than just a 2a issue .
I am also completely disgusted at the newspapers stand on its employees not being allowed to have an oppinion , they can get firedif they speak their mind on anything , so much for the freedom of speech and freedom of the press .
I'm working hard to swing her personally over to the side of the rightious but she has so much faith in the government that she simply will not question their motives , this is scary !

MD_Willington
January 28, 2009, 03:07 PM
The seattle pi ran a piece on the original lawsuit back in November 2008...

The reporter that ran the story was updated this morning in regards to that passing of the first injunction.

armedandsafe
January 28, 2009, 06:04 PM
Perhaps someone can tell me where I can get information on this? I looked through the RCW's, which mentioned there is supposed to be a handbook (published by fish and wildlife?), but I can't find anything at all. Is this publicly available or does it come with your permit along with the secret handshake?

Go ask your local Sheriff for a copy. They hand them out with each LCP, so have them in stock.

Pops

waverace
January 28, 2009, 11:58 PM
Just looked at the fiscal report for HB1052 , it states that in 2008 , 50 charges were brought up on the "old" law 46 of which were primary charges , I wonder how many of them were "law abiding" LPR's and if any of them were deported because of it . if the law is repealed do they get compensated and the conviction quashed ?

waverace
January 29, 2009, 10:16 AM
Todays the day the teddy bears have their pic-nic

Gungnir
January 29, 2009, 10:33 AM
IANAL but my logic would be...

They would only stand any real chance if the RCW was repealed because of court action declaring it Unconstitutional, and therefore illegal. Then they sued.

If the State eliminates the problem before they're prosecuted, then they have taken action to stop enforcing an unconstitutional law, and they're mostly clean. Since once this happens the legal situation is much more confused, the chances of successfully issuing a class action lawsuit against the state, for illegally repressing lawful rights of "under the jurisdiction thereof..." whether directly impacted (by arrest, conviction, and/or deportation, loss of Job etc.) or indirectly impacted for mental anguish. Is not as cut and dried. The burden of proof would be on the plaintiffs not the defendants, you'd have to prove that the law was Unconstitutional, and that the State demonstrated Mens Rea (intent) to enforce the law in FULL knowledge that the law was unconstitutional to basically prove knowingly victimizing Aliens. This is much more difficult to prove if the law is repealed in Olympia rather than the courts.

waverace
January 29, 2009, 10:38 AM
The fact that there have already been several attempts to fix this already constitutes (in my op) their knowledge that its wrong on some level .

waverace
January 29, 2009, 11:18 AM
Heres a question for those that understand how lawmaking works , on HB1052 there is a line that reads that there is an emergency clause and that the bill should be effective immediately , what does this mean in real life ?
If you are just guessing please say so if you know for sure then say also .
IMO it means that as soon as the governer signs that it should be effective and we should not have to wait until the RCW is actually physically rewritten .
Does this sound about right ?
Also I realise that this is not a one step process , so how long could we reasonably expect this to take ?

MD_Willington
January 29, 2009, 04:00 PM
I'll ask the Attorneys about that clause.

Gungnir
January 29, 2009, 06:37 PM
on HB1052
Jan 29 Executive action taken in the House Committee on Judiciary at 10:00 AM.
JUDI - Executive action taken by committee

armedandsafe
January 29, 2009, 07:33 PM
First reading. Keep sending notes and calls, people.

Pops

Gungnir
January 29, 2009, 10:25 PM
Yeah, just keeping the thread alive, and making sure that people are aware, write your State Congressmen found here. (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx)

Write them, asking for support of the bill, explain the current NRA/SAF situation, and how they're pursuing Washington State on 2nd and 14th amendment violations for LPR's.

The AFL re-issue is a small win and provides a small amount of relief, but we need to eliminate RCW 9.41.170 from the statute books.

waverace
January 29, 2009, 10:53 PM
ok so its gone through its first phase now onto round 2

cdninusa
January 30, 2009, 12:03 PM
more info available here...

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/cmd/default.aspx?cid=judi

You must use Internet Explorer for this to work properly. Firefox does not work on this part of the site.

go to the link above
click on the + before 1/29/2009
click on the + before possible executive session
click on 1052
you can see the proposed changes

Gungnir
January 30, 2009, 12:12 PM
Yeah nothing really changed. Except the removal of the emergency clause.

It will mean that the AFL will still apply to non-resident aliens.

waverace
January 30, 2009, 12:45 PM
NON resident is what it was originally designed for , thats actually a good thing as normally they would have no way of partaking in hunting or sporting activitys , I can appreciate the need for the government to have some kind of checks on them as they have not been through the immigration process.

carnaby
January 30, 2009, 01:14 PM
So resident aliens (green card) like my wife will no longer need the alien firearm permit???

waverace
January 30, 2009, 01:36 PM
if 1052 goes through yes , it makes the difference between non immigrants and immigrants thats why we are all praying for it . if it fails then we have to wait for the NRA lawsuit to kick it out altogether

MD_Willington
January 30, 2009, 02:46 PM
Carnaby, correct, your wife will not need the silly license.

Federal law already covers non-immigrant alien in possession of firearm, and there are certain provisions that cover visiting parties and how they can get excluded, I looked up all these laws back in 2001 when I was researching the WA State AFL.

In our case,LPRs, WA State thinks they can usurp FEDERAL law, bottom line is they cannot.

MD_Willington
January 30, 2009, 02:55 PM
Just got off the phone...

The budget or lack thereof is gumming up the works in Olympia at this time...

My insider will call me ASAP when things get going.

Gungnir
January 30, 2009, 03:09 PM
I don't think that WA State thinks they can usurp FEDERAL law, I don't think they're smart enough to think that in any way; which is why they're dragging their feet. They've been called on this and my suspicion is they don't comprehend the urgency they need to act on this. Which is why the thing was voted into law in the first place.

There's a large part of me that hopes this is declared unconstitutional in the State Supreme Court, and it's stricken from the Statute books. So here's to HB1052 being signed into law in September (for purely vindictive reasons).

carnaby
January 30, 2009, 03:26 PM
Why September? Shouldn't this happen right away?

Gungnir
January 30, 2009, 04:37 PM
Yes, however if the legislature doesn't get off its collective butt, and pass this bill, then law abiding residents (both LPR and US Citizens) have a better chance of suing the state for infringement of Constitutional rights.

They've already been warned that the law is very likely unconstitutional by the courts with the injunction to force the DOL to begin reissuing AFL's. If the case goes to trial, and finds for the plaintiff's then WA is liable for Constitutional Violations and Discrimination against LPR's, under the 14th amendment and the Civil Rights Bill of 1981.

i.e. while it ties up rights of LPR's for a while, striking the Statute by court is much more damaging to the state, than them self-correcting, and mealy mouthed apologizing later, with "we fixed it when we realized that it wasn't working as we expected. Sorry to trample your LPR rights for I think nearly 40 years".

MD_Willington
January 30, 2009, 05:07 PM
My local rep is in the Rules Committee, so is Moeller IIRC, at least we have two people in favor that I know of right now.

Contact the Rules Committee members and make them aware of the bill.

user3214
January 30, 2009, 05:15 PM
It is clear that the state doesn't care about that bill.

I kind of hope the bill doesn't pass, the lawsuit wins and the state is ordered to pay a few million for legal fees of the plaintiffs.
Then they can answer why they failed to act for 4 years straight to fix an unconstitutional law.

Gungnir
January 30, 2009, 05:18 PM
Yes, sorry, revenge fantasy aside.

We should try to drive this through the house as soon as possible.

I've just completed mailing the list of the Rules Committee, asking for their support for this bill, and restoring our RKBA rights by doing so.

MD_Willington
January 30, 2009, 06:37 PM
To answer a question posed earlier regarding removal of the emergency clause.


Hi Matt:
Thanks for your email. The removal of the emergency clause has no effect
on legal alien residence exemption from the requirement of a Alien
Firearm Permit. It merely means you will need to wait 90 days after the
governor signs the bill for it to become law.

Sincerely,

Jim

Rep. Jim Moeller


So 90 day wait AFTER the "gov" signs the bill, that is IF she signs the bill at all...

waverace
January 30, 2009, 07:26 PM
merely huh well ill maybe merely wait 90 days before i vote for these guys in the next elections

MD_Willington
January 30, 2009, 07:36 PM
I'll have my new AFL by then, if the HB ever goes the distance...

waverace
January 30, 2009, 07:51 PM
how long do you think its gonna take ?

cdninusa
January 30, 2009, 08:16 PM
New (substitute) bill with edits is here.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1052-S.pdf

It does appear they are actively working this, considering they have already made the edits from yesterday's Judiciary session and it is on the website today.

waverace
January 30, 2009, 11:55 PM
Ya know if I had married a woman from Nevada , I could now buy , own and shoot a Browning M2 machine gun (not that I could afford to buy or shoot one ) but I would be allowed , as it is I cannot even touch a single shot .22 without being in danger of arrest , jail time and deportation .:banghead:

MD_Willington
February 2, 2009, 10:31 AM
1052 info

JUDI - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass.

Judiciary gives it a thumbs up.. off to rules then.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?year=2009&bill=1052

Still applies to non-immigrant aliens...

Says it fixes some problems, makes no mention of 14th amendment violations, which is no surprise.


So on to the next task...

Contact the rules committee and hopefully the Rules committee gets this done.

waverace
February 2, 2009, 11:49 AM
Looking good so far ;)

Gungnir
February 2, 2009, 01:39 PM
Rules Committee Members

Mike Armstrong
Barbara Bailey
Frank Chopp
Richard DeBolt
Deborah Eddy
Mark Ericks
Tami Green
Bob Hasegawa
Zachary Hudgins
Norm Johnson
Troy Kelley
Lynn Kessler
Joel Kretz
Dan Kristiansen
Marko Liias
Jim Moeller
Dawn Morrell
Jeff Morris
Daniel Newhouse
Sharon Tomiko Santos
Joe Schmick
Larry Springer
Kevin Van de Wege
Judy Warnick

armedandsafe
February 2, 2009, 01:47 PM
Just shot another letter off to JW.

Pops

MD_Willington
February 2, 2009, 02:03 PM
Okay, I'm admitting, I'm not the most eloquent, nor the most coherent letter assembler at times, would someone like to tackle this in a form letter we can email?

I'm running up against a bunch of stuff here I need to get done.

However, I will assemble an email list.

Thank you.

MD_Willington
February 2, 2009, 02:47 PM
And for our staring cast members

Rules Committee

armstrong.mike@leg.wa.gov

bailey.barbara@leg.wa.gov

chopp.frank@leg.wa.gov

debolt.richard@leg.wa.gov

eddy.deborah@leg.wa.gov

ericks.mark@leg.wa.gov

green.tami@leg.wa.gov

hasegawa.bob@leg.wa.gov

hudgins.zachary@leg.wa.gov

johnson.norm@leg.wa.gov

kelley.troy@leg.wa.gov

kessler.lynn@leg.wa.gov

kretz.joel@leg.wa.gov

kristiansen.dan@leg.wa.gov

liias.marko@leg.wa.gov

moeller.jim@leg.wa.gov

morrell.dawn@leg.wa.gov

morris.jeff@leg.wa.gov

newhouse.dan@leg.wa.gov

santos.sharontomiko@leg.wa.gov

schmick.joe@leg.wa.gov

springer.larry@leg.wa.gov

vandewege.kevin@leg.wa.gov

warnick.judy@leg.wa.gov

Gungnir
February 2, 2009, 03:19 PM
Here's the pro-forma I've used before

RE: HB 1052 as sponsored by Representative Moeller et. Al.

This bill has been proposed to try to eliminate the Catch-22 situation that currently exists in possession of Firearms by both Legal Permanent Resident Aliens and Non-Immigrant aliens, by requiring an Alien Firearms License that cannot be issued by the issuing body.

As an LPR I believe that the current situation violates my second amendment rights, as given by the 14th amendment for equal protection and due process. This view is also held by the National Rifle Association, and the Second Amendment Foundation who are currently pursuing this through the State Federal Court.

It appears that the reading of this bill was referred to General Government Appropriations on Feb 2nd, given the current legal action being taken against the state it would seem prudent to both ensure that this bill is heard and ratified at the first opportunity.

Thank you for your time.

MD_Willington
February 2, 2009, 04:31 PM
That's cool..

I whipped this up over lunch, I did it this way because it seems to me that the people in Olympia would only focus on NRA and SAF and figure "no way, those feaking gun nuts"...

You probably get what I mean, they tend to hyper-focus on such things.

I attack it under the basis that it is discriminatory, only WA State does it, it is in violation of federal law, it still requires non-immigrants to get the license etcetera..

any who...


RE: HB 1052-2009 as sponsored by Representative Moeller et. Al.

Currently in Washington State, all Legal Permanent Resident Aliens, also known as "Green Card Holders" or “LPRs”, are required to obtain an Alien Firearms License from the Washington State Department of Licensing if they choose to own, borrow, rent or even as so much as hold a firearm, without fear of prosecution leading to deportation. This is in accordance to the current RCWs such as 9.41.070, 9.41.097, 9.41.0975, & 9.41.170 etc.

Amendment XIV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution states the following:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


In the remaining 49 States of the Union, LPRs are not subject to any such licensing. In the case of compulsory licensing for LPRs who reside in Washington State; it appears quite clearly that Washington State is, at present, in violation of the 14th amendment rights of all Legal Permanent Residents.

Washington State HB 1052-2009 has been proposed to eliminate the current discriminatory situation against LPRs. The laws affected and or modified by the passing of HB1052-2009 do not affect the mandatory licensing for Non-Immigrant Aliens; therefore the amended law(s) would not be in direct contradiction of Federal Laws.

As a Legal Permanent Resident who currently resides in Washington State, and is directly affected by the current RCWs, I would hope that you would be in favor of amending such discriminatory laws by supporting the immediate passing of HB1052-2009.


Thank you for the honor of your time.

Gungnir
February 2, 2009, 06:17 PM
I like yours too.

Maybe if we hit 'em alternating, scare them with the NRA/SAF since we're all obviously raving redneck gun-nuts, followed by the discriminatory aspect, since WA is a supposedly progressive state, and possibly has one of the highest counts of Legal Permanent aliens and Non-Resident Aliens (who become LPRs) of all states in the union, as a percentage of population.

Either or, I sent mine already :)

carnaby
February 2, 2009, 06:38 PM
I used your form letter, thanks. Just got this reply from one of the recipients:

Hi Ben, actually after 9-11 the federal government passed legislation that says that legal aliens had to get their gun permits from a law enforcement agency and Rep. Moeller’s bill HB 1052 moves that authority to issue the permits from the DOL to the sheriffs and state patrol to bring us into compliance with the federal law.



Maureen Gallegos
Legislative Assistant to
Representative Jim Moeller, 49th District
P.O. Box 40600
Olympia, WA 98504
360-786-7872


Any idea what she's talking about? I sure don't.

MD_Willington
February 2, 2009, 07:22 PM
Call her on it, tell her to provide you with proof, be nice about it, "I'd like to see that on paper please..." etcetera.

To me, she seems to be talking about the fact that the FBI told the DOL they could not access the NLETS background checks, only a LEA could have access to the information...

What she's saying is we still need a license, but we get it from the Sheriff, which is BUNK! since only WA State has the stupid license for green card holders.

If what she thinks is true then every State of the Union would have a similar license for a LPR, and they DO NOT...

{/ MD smacks forehead with palm...

Gungnir
February 2, 2009, 07:49 PM
Yeah, also point her at the USCIS Dept Homeland Security.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/100q.pdf

Question 50 Name one right only for United States citizens
Question 51 What are two rights of everyone living in the US

Explain she might fail a Citizenship test, and you're concerned that she's a legislative assistant who has shown a distinct lack of knowledge that any newly naturalized Citizen should know.:banghead:

carnaby
February 2, 2009, 07:54 PM
Already sent:

Hi Maureen,

I do not know about the federal legislation to which you refer. What gun permits? I do know that my brother-in-law in Texas, who was until last year a legal alien (now a US citizen), required no "gun permit" whatsoever to buy/own a firearm in Texas. Same for when he lived in Oregon. I'm hoping that the same will apply in Washington State to my Canadian wife after HB1052 passes. Please clarify what you wrote in the last message.

Best regards,

Ben

MD_Willington
February 2, 2009, 08:10 PM
Gungnir.. LOL.. Yeah I've seen that before too..

Good job carnaby, I run into this a lot with friends in Idah, they always want to know about the permit/license, they find it quite ridiculous that we LPRs made it this far to get a green card since they know we've been really grilled for background checks...


You know how uppity we can get LOL

carnaby
February 2, 2009, 08:40 PM
I got a direct response from Jim Moeller, who was represented in the last email by Maureen Gallegos:

Hi Ben:

You are correct. Legal residents (except legal, immigrant and non-immigrant aliens) do not currently need a “gun permit” to own or possess a firearm in Washington State EXCEPT for a Concealed Weapon Permit. If HB1052 is passed and signed by the governor, then legal immigrant (RESIDENT) aliens will be exempt from the requirement of having a AFP and will only need a “permit” for a Concealed Weapons Permit.

Only non-immigrant aliens coming to hunt or participate in a shooting event or competition will be required to possess a AFP to be in possession of a weapon. I hope this help clarify.

-jm


To which I responded:

Yep, that's what I thought. So I hope that you will support the bill!

Thanks!

-Ben

carnaby
February 2, 2009, 10:06 PM
OK, duh, it's his bill. :P

Gungnir
February 2, 2009, 10:23 PM
You might want to get Jim to inform his assistant of that fact :)

Maureen Gallegos
Legislative Assistant to
Representative Jim Moeller, 49th District
P.O. Box 40600
Olympia, WA 98504
360-786-7872

MD_Willington
February 3, 2009, 11:04 AM
FYI, keep getting this

550 5.1.1 <hudgins.zachary@leg.wa.gov>... User unknown
<<< 550 5.1.1 User unknown
550 5.1.1 <warnick.judy@leg.wa.gov>... User unknown

Gungnir
February 3, 2009, 11:08 AM
Hmm. Can you find them in the legislature, I did it all through the web site.

Gungnir
February 3, 2009, 11:13 AM
Judy Warnick
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/MailForm.aspx?Chamber=H&District=13&Position=1

Couldn't find Zachary Hudgins listed, maybe I didn't get him, or maybe he was fired, or something.

MD_Willington
February 3, 2009, 01:05 PM
No he does not have a contact me by email, but try hudgins.zack@leg.wa.gov

MD_Willington
February 4, 2009, 02:11 PM
Just adding this here:

Do you Facebook?

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=58884129771

If so, spread the word...

Gungnir
February 4, 2009, 10:06 PM
Status update

Feb 10 Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on General Government Appropriations at 8:00 AM. (Subject to change)

General Government Appropriations Committee
Darneille, Jeannie (D) Chair darneille.j@leg.wa.gov (mailto://darneille.j@leg.wa.gov)
Takko, Dean (D) Vice Chair takko.dean@leg.wa.gov (mailto://takko.dean@leg.wa.gov)
McCune, Jim (R) mccune.jim@leg.wa.gov (mailto://mccune.jim@leg.wa.gov)
Hinkle, Bill (R) hinkle.bill@leg.wa.gov (mailto://hinkle.bill@leg.wa.gov)
Armstrong, Mike (R) armstrong.mike@leg.wa.gov (mailto://armstrong.mike@leg.wa.gov)
Blake, Brian (D) blake.brian@leg.wa.gov (mailto://blake.brian@leg.wa.gov)
Crouse, Larry (R) crouse.larry@leg.wa.gov (mailto://crouse.larry@leg.wa.gov)
Dunshee, Hans (D) dunshee.hans@leg.wa.gov (mailto://dunshee.hans@leg.wa.gov)
Hudgins, Zachary (D)
Kenney, Phyllis Gutierrez (D) kenney.phyllis@leg.wa.gov (mailto://kenney.phyllis@leg.wa.gov)
Pedersen, Jamie (D) pedersen.jamie@leg.wa.gov (mailto://pedersen.jamie@leg.wa.gov)
Sells, Mike (D) sells.mike@leg.wa.gov (mailto://sells.mike@leg.wa.gov)
Short, Shelly (R) short.shelly@leg.wa.gov (mailto://short.shelly@leg.wa.gov)
Van De Wege, Kevin (D) vandewege.kevin@leg.wa.gov (mailto://vandewege.kevin@leg.wa.gov)
Williams, Brendan (D) williams.brendan@leg.wa.gov (mailto://williams.brendan@leg.wa.gov)

Bulk Mail Address here (mailto://darneille.j@leg.wa.gov;takko.dean@leg.wa.gov;mccune.jim@leg.wa.gov;hinkle.bill@leg.wa.gov;armstrong.mike@leg.wa.gov;blake.brian@leg.wa.gov;crouse.larry@leg.wa.gov;dunshee.hans@leg.wa.gov;kenney.phyllis@leg.wa.gov;pedersen.jamie@leg.wa.gov;sells.mike@leg.wa.gov;short.shelly@leg.wa.gov;vandewege.kevin@leg.wa.gov;williams.brendan@leg.wa.gov)

waverace
February 4, 2009, 11:10 PM
This is good , Its moving pretty quick , did a random check on other bills introduced this year , most havent even got a judi date yet .
Keep up the good work guys .

Gungnir
February 4, 2009, 11:44 PM
Hey we're just doing the same as you guys and keeping our legislators informed.

The only other thing is we're keeping you guys informed so you can keep the legislators informed.

Group effort.

waverace
February 4, 2009, 11:59 PM
From what I can see there are 3 hearings that the bill has to go through in the house , following that it must go through the same process in the senate , then it can be signed by both houses and passed to the governor for signing , I am finding it difficult to work out exactly where in the chain it is but I think this is the second reading in the house of representatives that is coming up , so one more here after that then off to the senate .
This is going to take a while but its looking good so far .

MD_Willington
February 5, 2009, 03:59 AM
I just hope this goes the distance, if it does, then my wife will not have to get a license too... Yep, she's an LPR as well!

MD_Willington
February 9, 2009, 08:20 PM
Tomorrow is another big day... hope it goes well.

esteli
February 10, 2009, 04:42 PM
Been lurking on this forum forever regarding this issue, and I just found out today that the licenses have been reinstated. I've already called the DOL to request my application.

I'm watching this bill like a hawk. I had the privilege of talking to Sen. Schoessler about the issue late last fall and he was very sincere about the issue of gun rights, and I couldn't be more proud to have him as my representative. I also got to talk to Rep. Moeller.

I'll certainly be contacting them about it. You guys have been amazing at keeping at this and I'm right there with you.

Even if the suspense is killing me.

MD_Willington
February 10, 2009, 06:01 PM
esteli, where about are you located?

I have copies of the form if you're near Pullman WA, I can get you a copy...

esteli
February 10, 2009, 06:09 PM
I'm actually in Pullman. I'd love a copy of that application!

-Elizabeth

Steely
February 10, 2009, 06:13 PM
Any news come through yet?

esteli
February 10, 2009, 06:31 PM
It was in a hearing on General Government Appropriations, which determines the financial impact of bills. You can see http://apps.leg.wa.gov/cmd/default.aspx?cid=appg
Click 2/10/2009 8:00AM>Public Hearing>1052
It says "not heard."
We'll see where it goes from here.

waverace
February 10, 2009, 07:46 PM
so why did it not get heard ?, it was first on the list , so not as if they didnt have time )-:

MD_Willington
February 10, 2009, 08:18 PM
Well if it goes down in flames, we still have the lawsuit, but I don't want the issue to be one of those "put all your eggs in one basket" deals...

Gungnir
February 10, 2009, 09:31 PM
Dunno, Sent mail to Jim Moeller to see what he knows since it's his bill.

When I get a response I'll post here.

thanks

Gungnir
February 10, 2009, 09:37 PM
Service with a smile :)

Hi Mark:
I don't know what to say about the web site but the bill was heard in Government Ops Appropriations as scheduled. There was one small concern raised by the Dept of Fish and Wildlife that will be taken care of with an amendment.

Thanks for your interest!
-jm

Gungnir
February 10, 2009, 09:38 PM
Oh and in under 5 minutes

MD_Willington
February 10, 2009, 10:02 PM
WoW.

That was PDQ!

Dept of Fish and Wildlife eh... wonder what they want to stick their nose into it for..?

Gungnir
February 10, 2009, 10:22 PM
Yeah, I told him I was point contact on this for Work too...
Don't know how many LPR/NIA's there are there but its a few 1000 :D

I wonder whether the Dept F&W are trying to incorporate the hunting clause from the SB from a while back. Or just sticking their noses in or maybe Aliens are considered wildlife :)

waverace
February 10, 2009, 10:38 PM
Dangerous game (-:

furball
February 11, 2009, 02:29 PM
I am an LPR moving to WA from TN at the end of month because of a new job. I was planning to sell my guns. But if this pass, I just need some friends to hold them for me for a while. Let's hope everything go smoothly. MD_Willington and all guys here, thank you so much for the effort.

Gungnir
February 11, 2009, 02:59 PM
Well, you can apply for an AFL now at least; ideally we want the law repealed, but if you have an AFL you can at least keep your guns.

zaharia
February 11, 2009, 03:43 PM
I'm a little confused. Gungnir, you say that you can at least apply for an AFL now that the applications are going out again, but isn't the FBI still refusing to supply the background check to the DOL?

Gungnir
February 11, 2009, 03:54 PM
Yes, the were refusing, but the NRA/SAF got an injunction against the DOL and they've enforced reissuing these. Which means the case that the SAF/NRA has has some significant legal merit for Constitutional infringement.

HB1052 is also going through the state legislature at this time, so hopefully this will repeal RCW 9.41.170 too. But if not then the SAF/NRA lawsuit against WA has a good possibility of declaring the RCW as unconstitutional.

zaharia
February 11, 2009, 04:06 PM
Thanks for the response. So, just filling out the form and sending it in will still result in a refusal to issue an AFL because they still can't get an FBI background check currently?
So, still best to wait on applying for the AFL?

MD_Willington
February 11, 2009, 04:43 PM
Okay, so I'm no lawyer, but because of the signed injunction, DOL shall "promptly issue the license".

I figure it would work like this:

WSP has 30 days to do the BG check from when they get the request to check if you have a WA State drivers license, 60 days if you do not.

Then WSP can just say over the phone to the DOL, "so and so is good to go", WSP just can't hand over the results of the check to DOL because that ain't allowed.

Why isn't sharing info allowed... seems pretty silly to me...



PS

esteli, I have a copy of the app if you need it, we can meet in Pullman if you'd like.

zaharia
February 11, 2009, 05:15 PM
So, does that mean that the FBI is completely out of the picture regarding background checks now on AFL applications and WSP background check is all they need at the DOL?

Gungnir
February 11, 2009, 06:23 PM
Maybe, maybe not, I do know that the FBI refused to issue background checks for AFL's previously because of an error that occurred with WSP releasing FBI background check information, apparently at the behest of the DOL.

Now they have effectively been given a "SHALL ISSUE" injunction, a little like a CPL, unless there is evidence that you can't have an AFL they must issue it.

zaharia
February 11, 2009, 07:43 PM
Well, I just called the DOL firearm number and spoke to a very nice lady who is going to send me a couple new applications. I asked her if I would be wasting my time and money sending them in because as I understood it, that the FBI still needed to do a background check and wouldn't issue it to them because of them being non law enforcement agency. (the reason they stopped issuing and even sending out applications)
She informed me that all I would need is local law enforcement do a background check and fingerprints and pay my money and that is now good enough for them. She said the FBI is out of the equation now as far as they are concerned. :)

Now, I just need to re-apply to the Canadian consulate for another background "refusal" letter, because mine is almost a year old now and I believe it needs to have been issued within the last 6 months.
Hopefully, by the time I get that back, the law will have been changed and I will no longer need it. Until then, I will apply for it.

MD_Willington
February 11, 2009, 08:24 PM
How's this for cool..

I too just got off the phone with DOL...

According to the woman I spoke with, my license is .... drum roll please...



:what: !! WOO HOO !! - The FIRST NEW License issued in 3 years - !! WOO HOO !! :what:



It is being printed right now and will be in the mail tomorrow !!


:D !! WOO HOO !! :D



zaharia


I did not need to send in my refusal letter, I sent the following:

Photocopy of Drivers License (Issued 2006)
Photocopy of Expired AFL (2002-2007)
Photocopy of Green Card (Issued 2005)
Photocopy of CPL (Issued 2006)

And that is all they needed, caveat - I've lived here for almost 9 years now..!

cdninusa
February 11, 2009, 09:59 PM
she didn't happen to mention if there were others going out with yours did she?
I applied on the first day it was available.
Hopefully mine is on the way as well.

waverace
February 11, 2009, 11:24 PM
OK I caved , I just Emailed DOL asking them to send me an AFL application packet , I also asked if there would be a refund if HB 1052 or the NRA lawsuit went through .
I'll keep you posted if they reply .

zaharia
February 11, 2009, 11:52 PM
MD
I have never had a AFL before, so I don't have an expired one to send in.
I do have a green card, Washington Drivers license and have been here for just over 3 years. I still think I need to send in a request for a criminal background check refusal letter from the consulate dated within the last 6 months?

Congrats on yours!

waverace
February 12, 2009, 12:18 AM
I dont have an expired AFL either I'm gonna just send in the application with whatever fingerpint stuff from the sheriff that I need and see what happens .
MD could you maybe post a definative list of required actions and documents ? for those of us that are still unsure where to go and what to get .

zaharia
February 12, 2009, 12:46 AM
If it is your first application for an AFL then you just need to follow what the application says to send in. That's what I was told by the DOL today. Same deal as before they stopped sending them out.

MD_Willington
February 12, 2009, 01:34 AM
I agree if it is your first time you probably should stick with what is on the list,

but before you do that, the DOL is being very forthcoming

I would go ahead and call the DOL, they seem to really want to help now.

That is the best source of information at this time.


PS

My consulate was very quick to send me a refusal letter, if you are a Canadian, you will probably get a letter from Consulate officer Ruth Gunn <-- cool name eh!

cdninusa
February 12, 2009, 02:48 AM
for the record, according to the lady that processes these at the DOL, if you have been a WA resident for more than 2 years and can prove it with a WA State DL, then you don't even need to get the refusal letter from the Canadian consulate. Just send them a coy of your DL that was issued more than 2 years ago and you're good. There are other possible options to prove 2 year residence; best to call them on this.

waverace
February 12, 2009, 11:50 AM
well I got an email reply from the DOL this morning here is the email in its entirety

Good morning~



An application packet will be mailed to you this morning. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of any other assistance.



Have a nice day!



Zandra Stephens
Customer Service
Firearms Unit
(360) 664-6616

"The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. "

— Nelson Mandela



Doesnt answer my question about the refunds but sounds friendly .

zaharia
February 12, 2009, 01:34 PM
If this info helps anyone. I have been in Washington for just over 3 years, but have only had my Wash. DL for one year and also an out of date refusal letter from the consulate. (needs to be within 6 months) So, I emailed and asked if there is any other proof I can provide to show that I was living here for more than two years. Here is the reply. I should add that they are answering emails very quickly now. :)
***
If you have a bill or some other document with your name and the date on it that would work.

Please let us know if you have any other questions.

Have a nice day!

Zandra Stephens

cdninusa:
I inquired about this and you STILL DO need the refusal letter. See their answer below that I just received this morning.
*****
If you read the instructions that were provided in the application packet you will see under the heading ‘MORE THAN TWO YEARS AS WASHINGTON RESIDENT’, section A states that if your consulate cannot fulfill your request in a 90 day time frame then you may use the refusal letter in place of the certified copy of the criminal history background check. With that we also need proof that you have been a resident for two years or more.

Sorry for causing confusion. Please let me know if I can be of any other assistance

Zandra Stephens

Steely
February 12, 2009, 03:31 PM
I dont think we have a UK consulate in Washington. I talked to DOL and the lady said I would be ok without a copy of criminal history. This will save some time.

WTG MD you deserve getting the first license, you have been very helpful to all in getting to where we are. Thank you.

Tim

Steely
February 12, 2009, 08:24 PM
I just drove 15 miles to our local Police dept, only to be told they dont do the fingerprinting there, I have to go to Lacey (another 15 miles). So I get there and they confere between each other, and say I have to go to Olympia (another 10 miles). I get there and the guy says they do not issue them anymore, I told him they had been reinstated , he got on his phone and then told me,yes we do now issue them, BUT he cannot do it today because he has a doctors appointment to go to!!!!!!!!! Come back tomorrow. I am fuming at the moment.
Tim

Gungnir
February 12, 2009, 08:24 PM
Hey Steely no they don't the UK rationalized back to San-Fran in 2005 IIRC. I sent them a copy of my Drivers license that dated to 2005 (still current). Mentioned that there was no consulate, in Seattle you can see her response.

I emailed Zandra today (she kicks ass, we should consider getting a collection together and sending her some flowers or something).

Copy of mail below

Good afternoon Mark~

We have not yet received you application from the KCSO. We do have the documentation that you sent to us, it looks good, thank you. Once we receive your application from the KCSO we will match up your documentation with your application and then electronically submit your license to our printer. Your license will be mailed to you directly from our printer, you should receive it about one week after it’s been submitted by us to the printer.

Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Have a nice afternoon!

Zandra Stephens

Fr**king KCSO:cuss:

waverace
February 12, 2009, 09:44 PM
Hey Steely , I think I am going to have to go to the same sheriffs dept as you can you pm me the address thanks .

MD_Willington
February 12, 2009, 10:10 PM
Thanks guys!

I phoned Adrian, the Adrian listed in the lawsuit, he is still waiting on his AFL...

I guess my Sheriff "Gets R Done" ASAP..! or maybe just the West Side is taking their sweet time.. don't know..


I met esteli (http://www.thehighroad.org/member.php?u=83815) the other night in Pullman WA, she's here from Canada too, and she now has the AFL application.

waverace
February 13, 2009, 10:10 PM
well I got my application packet in the post today , for those of us without a consulate in WA state we do NOT need to get a letter of refusal , so I'm gonna get on and fill it out this weekend and go see the sheriff as soon as I can afford the 75 bucks , I guess we might as well git er done.

Steely
February 14, 2009, 12:24 AM
I might just wait a few days, to see what happens on Tuesday. Thanks Gungnir for posting this in the other forum.

Update on HR1052

Feb 17 Scheduled for executive session in the House Committee on General Government Appropriations at 8:00 AM. (Subject to change)

MD_Willington
February 14, 2009, 03:02 PM
Yeah I thought about waiting too, but this is something I've been waiting for since August 2007...

Plus I just received mt tax return, so I' going to go "stimulate" the local economy.

If the Bill passes, that is even better, but for me, right now, getting a new AFL until all this other stuff is figured out is a sound investment.

Gungnir
February 14, 2009, 03:22 PM
Yeah, Steely be aware, I'm not completely sure whether Tuesday's meeting will lead to it being pushed to the State Senate (and it will need 3 readings there), or need a further reading.

I think that the best we could hope for is that HB1052 might be passed through the legislature by the end of April, as to when it becomes law, it could be up to the end of the current legislative session (Sept IIRC).

zaharia
February 16, 2009, 02:37 AM
Funny thing for me anyway on this is that the DOL is still charging the $24 FBI fee, even though they say that the FBI are now out of the picture as far as background checks. :-P

MD_Willington
February 16, 2009, 10:57 AM
That is the nature of this beast, they must perform the "sacred rituals", seems almost like the city of ember, "not my job"...

If you read the book of see the movie, you'll know what I mean.

;)

Gungnir
February 16, 2009, 11:37 AM
ROFL...

Yeah, must follow protocol, regardless of success of protocol. Welcome to the world of the Civil Servant ants.

In a similar vein, I'd recommend the "Book of Dave" by Will Self.

MD_Willington
February 17, 2009, 02:06 PM
Just heard that HB 1052-2009-10 was passed out of committee this morning.

esteli
February 17, 2009, 04:27 PM
MD - congrats on getting you license in the mail!

Steely - that sucks! Guess that's why you should always call ahead ... :s

I'm still waiting on my refusal letter from the Canadian Consulate here. I hope that comes quick, I want to get that license already so I can get my CPL!

You'd think I'd have more patience after sitting around waiting for all the immigration stuff I did a couple years ago. TG I can apply for citizenship next year and be done with the sprawling immigration bureaucracy! :banghead:

Steely
February 17, 2009, 08:14 PM
Ok now I'm pissed off. I just got back from the Sheriffs Office (second time, first time the guy had doctors appointment) 35 miles away, and they call me at home to say they did the finger printing WRONG !!!!!!! Back tomorrow.
They took ink prints, should they take digital ones?
Tim

MD_Willington
February 18, 2009, 11:55 AM
You're fine with ink.

choppers 316
February 19, 2009, 01:55 AM
esteli....when did you send letter to canadian consulate.....I sent mine last week... still nothing back yet...

MD_Willington
February 19, 2009, 09:43 AM
It takes a little while.

It may only be Consulate Officer Ruth Gunn answering the letters.

choppers 316
February 19, 2009, 11:51 AM
Oh o.k....... Thanks MD.......Also, when I get my prints done, does the LEA keep part of my application package and send that in to the DOL.....and then I send in my section of the app....?????

MD_Willington
February 19, 2009, 02:15 PM
Yes, they keep that last few pages, if you look at the back of the last one, that is what they look up on their computer, and they put the little check marks in the boxes...

That is probably what they are using as proof of no criminal record now... the LEA sign-off, and it just gives an "Okay to go" and nothing else...

zaharia
February 19, 2009, 08:17 PM
choppers 316
I sent mine in late last week as well. Came today in the mail.

MD_Willington
February 20, 2009, 01:16 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen, HB1052 is still looking good

This is from the thread in legal:

FYI

Feb 19 Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.


HB 1052-S2 - DIGEST
(DIGEST OF PROPOSED 2ND SUBSTITUTE)
Repeals the current alien firearm license statute and establishes new requirements and procedures governing possession of firearms by noncitizens.
Prescribes penalties.


RE "noncitizens"

Summary of Substitute Bill:
The alien firearm statute is repealed and new requirements for the possession of firearms by non-citizens are established.

The prohibition on a non-citizen's possession of a firearm without an alien firearm license only applies to nonimmigrant aliens. A non-citizen who is not a nonimmigrant alien (e.g., a permanent resident alien) is no longer subject to a criminal penalty for possessing a firearm without having obtained an alien firearm license.



Fingers crossed here folks

Back to the Rules committee

esteli
February 20, 2009, 03:11 AM
Choppers, I actually called the Consulate rather than mailing them. I got my refusal letter on Wednesday, so it actually got mailed out the day I called last week (On Thursday or Friday, don't remember). Anyone who needs to contact the Canadian Embassy, I highly recommend calling. The lady I spoke with immediately understood the alien firearms licensing process and knew that the refusal letter was what I needed (it came from Ruth Gunn for me as well, seems like she is the lady). Hopefully my license comes as quickly!

I'm still really rooting for HB1052 all the way though. Having the licenses back is just a step towards the right direction.

hso
February 20, 2009, 08:03 AM
This is becoming a discussion of the trials and successes in getting the licence and that's going to get the thread shut down since it has moved out of the realm of Activism.

I see two options. Either the OT discussions stop and you can open a thread in general or legal OR I can move this whole thread to Activism Discussion.

Let me know by COB eastern what you'd rather happen.

Gungnir
February 20, 2009, 10:31 AM
Hey Folks, can we please keep this on track?

This is specifically for reporting HR1052/AFL's and communicating action.

Please transfer other business surrounding your experiences to
this thread http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=405574&page=12 Thanks

MD_Willington
March 2, 2009, 02:48 PM
May want to give the rules committee a quick email

HB1052-2009-10 - Feb 26 Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.

I'm going to email my peeps in Olympia.

Gungnir
March 3, 2009, 07:06 PM
2009 REGULAR SESSION
Dec 30 Prefiled for introduction.
Jan 12 First reading, referred to Judiciary. (View Original Bill)
Jan 15 Public hearing in the House Committee on Judiciary at 10:00 AM.
Jan 29 Executive action taken in the House Committee on Judiciary at 10:00 AM.
JUDI - Executive action taken by committee.
JUDI - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass. (View 1st Substitute)
Feb 2 Referred to General Government Appropriations.
Feb 10 Public hearing in the House Committee on General Government Appropriations at 8:00 AM.
Feb 17 Executive action taken in the House Committee on General Government Appropriations at 8:00 AM.
APPG - Executive action taken by committee.
APPG - Majority; 2nd substitute bill be substituted, do pass. (View 2nd Substitute)
Feb 19 Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.
Feb 26 Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.
Mar 3 2nd substitute bill substituted (APPG 09). (View 2nd Substitute)
Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.
Third reading, passed; yeas, 97; nays, 0; absent, 0; excused, 0. (View Roll Calls)

I think this now moves to state Senate. Not totally sure though, but it is marked as Third reading passed.

MD_Willington
March 3, 2009, 08:09 PM
Please contact everyone on the State Senate Floor.. lets push this HARD !

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/Default.aspx?Chamber=S

Gungnir
March 3, 2009, 10:40 PM
Done, covered the whole floor asking for support.

I think my fingers are bleeding, and my IP is about to get banned from the wa.gov domain.

MD_Willington
March 3, 2009, 11:52 PM
I've spread the word to other forums, I've also asked Adrian and the others to help too.

armedandsafe
March 4, 2009, 01:06 AM
Talking to Bill Hinkle, we have been doing a GOOD job.

Pops

chuckusaret
March 4, 2009, 11:23 AM
Question is, do your state rep's ever see your e-mails. I doubt it, their assistants comment on the subject and number if anything. I believe the letter writers have a better chance to get through to the rep's with their mailings. My experience, never got an e-mail reply but have received replies to my letters sent to my state rep. on every letter sent. I will admit some only stated "Thank you for making congressman so and so aware of your concerns" Hope you have more luck than we have here in Florida

PBinWA
March 4, 2009, 12:29 PM
Question is, do your state rep's ever see your e-mails. I doubt it, their assistants comment on the subject and number if anything. I believe the letter writers have a better chance to get through to the rep's with their mailings. My experience, never got an e-mail reply but have received replies to my letters sent to my state rep. on every letter sent. I will admit some only stated "Thank you for making congressman so and so aware of your concerns" Hope you have more luck than we have here in Florida


My WA State Senator Jim Honeyford, is awesome. He replies back very quickly and it appears to be him in person. He appears to be a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment.

MD_Willington
March 4, 2009, 01:47 PM
Mine regularly reply, my local guy has my home phone number I have his.

We know each other on a face to face basis, his assistant in Olympia calls me whenever there is a hot topic or something going on, we too have each others cel numbers.

I see them every year at the 4th of July parade.

I work with Sen. Eric Oemig's mother in law, and he has replied to me that he would support the HB.

Most if not all I have contacted have contacted me back, some promptly too.


Anyway, we can discuss this further in the post in the Legal section.

Thanks.

chuckusaret
March 4, 2009, 08:19 PM
You guys are lucky. We don't have any rep's like that.

MD_Willington
March 5, 2009, 04:11 PM
Please contact these folks and ask them to support HB1052-10-2009

If that is the same Judiciary as before, then they may just rubber stamp it "Pass", but just in case:

Representative Steve Kirby
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7996
Kirby.Steve@leg.wa.gov

Representative Dennis Flannigan
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7930
Flannigan.Dennis@leg.wa.gov

Representative Timm Ormsby
Democrat
Spokane
(360) 786-7946
Ormsby.Timm@leg.wa.gov

Representative Jay Rodne
Republican
North Bend
(360) 786-7852
Rodne.Jay@leg.wa.gov

Representative Mary Helen Roberts
Democrat
Lynnwood
(360) 786-7950
Roberts.MaryHelen@leg.wa.gov

Representative Roger Goodman
Democrat
Kirkland
(360) 786-7878
Goodman.Roger@leg.wa.gov

Representative Troy Kelley
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7890
Kelley.Troy@leg.wa.gov

Representative Jamie Pedersen
Democrat
Seattle
(360) 786-7826
Pedersen.Jamie@leg.wa.gov

Representative Charles Ross
Republican
Naches
(360) 786-7856
Ross.Charles@leg.wa.gov

Representative Judy Warnick
Republican
Moses Lake
(360) 786-7932
Warnick.Judith@leg.wa.gov

Representative Matthew Shea
Republican
Mead
(360) 786-7984
Shea.Matt@leg.wa.gov

waverace
March 5, 2009, 04:21 PM
Emails sent , good work MD lets keep it up .

NewWAstate
March 14, 2009, 02:49 AM
Seems to be dragging a little, put in the emails last week, no response, but did not request one through their form. Thanks for the list MD. I have had responses from my local reps. Cheers.

PBinWA
May 3, 2009, 12:01 PM
Bump - any updates on this?

Steely
May 5, 2009, 05:26 AM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=405574&page=19

MD_Willington
May 5, 2009, 04:28 PM
Sorry, meant to update this:


Apr 25 Governor signed.
Chapter 216, 2009 Laws. (View Session Law)
Effective date 7/26/2009

This means a Green Card holder is no longer required to "purchase" a WA State Alien Firearms License.


! Have fun !

BP Hunter
May 21, 2009, 11:26 PM
THE NEW ALIENS FIREARMS LICENSE LAW
2HB1052 has passed the 2009 legislative session, and will go into effect on July 26, 2009. During the time before July 26th, the existing Aliens Firearms Law remains in effect.
WHAT DOES THIS NEW LAW MEAN?

It is a class C felony for any person who is not a citizen of the United States to carry or possess any firearm, unless:
o
That person is a lawful permanent resident who resides in Washington (permanent resident card).
o
Has obtained a valid aliens firearms license, either the existing 5 year license or the new 2 year license.
o
Is a non-immigrant alien who is not residing in Washington and who has in their possession:
��
Valid passport and visa showing he/she is legally in the country.
��
If required under federal law, an approved ATF-6 NIA application and permit for temporary importation of firearms and ammunition.
��
A valid hunting license issued by a state or territory of the United States or
��
An invitation to participate in a trade show or sport shooting event being conducted in this state, another state, or another country that is contiguous with Washington, for example, Canada.
WHO NEEDS TO OBTAIN THE NEW TWO YEAR ALIENS FIREARMS LICENSE AFTER JULY 26TH?

The non-immigrant alien who is temporarily residing in Washington, such as:
o
Students on temporary school visas
o
People on temporary work visas
WHO DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE THIS NEW ALIENS LICENSE?

Permanent resident alien (Immigrant Alien with permanent resident card)

The non-immigrant alien not residing in Washington who is here visiting or vacationing for hunting or participating in trade shows or shooting events.
WHERE DO YOU APPLY FOR THE NEW LICENSE?

The sheriff’s office in the county where you reside.

City police departments will not be issuing this license.
HOW MUCH WILL THE NEW LICENSE COST?

The cost of this license is $50.00 plus $19.25 fingerprinting fee for the FBI. Plus additional fingerprinting costs for the Washington State Patrol:
o
$16.00 for live scan printing
o
$26.00 for 2 fingerprint cards
SOME DEFINITIONS:

IMMIGRANT ALIEN – Is any person that has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence and has been afforded the privilege of residing in the United States. They would possess a permanent resident card.

NON-IMMIGRANT ALIEN - are those persons that have a residence in a foreign country which he or she has no intention of abandoning. They are admitted to the United States for a temporary period of time and for a specific purpose. Examples are students with school visas, and people on temporary work visas.

allserene
July 29, 2009, 11:18 PM
It works

Bought 2 new rifles on the first business day after the law changes

I was 'kicked upstairs' as I am a green card person and didnt get approved for a few hours.

I was also asked for electricity bills - weird as I have a driver's license in washington for which you need utility bills etc etc etc

Apparently this was the FEDS
Also the delay was mainly USCIS

only a few hours


Still I got there, loving it and burning 223 ammo like a mujahaddin with Parkinson's, on crack and with a scorpion in his underpants and who has just won the lottery

Diamondback6
July 30, 2009, 12:59 AM
Almost as confusing as the previous version...

Still leaves my friends who are FN's that I'd like to check out on iron if they drop in to visit hanging, AFAICT.

jww
July 30, 2009, 10:54 PM
So, If I read this right ... a fiance'...now wife of an American citizen...CAN obtain a legal permit for a firearm?? Especially for hunting and shooting needs.

Six
July 30, 2009, 11:36 PM
It works

Bought 2 new rifles on the first business day after the law changes

I was 'kicked upstairs' as I am a green card person and didnt get approved for a few hours.

I was also asked for electricity bills - weird as I have a driver's license in washington for which you need utility bills etc etc etc

Apparently this was the FEDS
Also the delay was mainly USCIS

only a few hours


Yeah, it's a federal requirement that you show proof for 90 days of continuous residency in the state. I store my last 4 electrical bills just for that purpose.

You'll also get delayed every time for a little bit at an FFL during the background check as they'll check with immigration to ensure that you're legal. I've had it take as little as 20 minutes to go through.

Glad to see the the WA aliens enjoying their rights!

Six
July 30, 2009, 11:37 PM
So, If I read this right ... a fiance'...now wife of an American citizen...CAN obtain a legal permit for a firearm?? Especially for hunting and shooting needs.

It depends on immigration status, not marital status.

carnaby
July 31, 2009, 02:26 PM
There is no "Permit for a firearm" in Washington State. She can get a carry permit, if that's what you are talking about, and as Six wrote, if she's a legal resident alien.

MD_Willington
August 11, 2009, 01:45 AM
They will still do an "Alien in question" check to make sure you're still legal

hso
August 13, 2009, 06:53 AM
Now that the law is in place the conversation should be continued over in legal instead of Activism.

If you enjoyed reading about "WA State Alien Firearms Licenses Part II" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!