WA State Alien Firearms Licenses

The question is, would the media want to make a story of this... they only tend to gravitate towards the negative in regards to firearms...

Maybe contact Rossi and see how he feels about the subject, we know how Queen G and her posse feel about it...

Click to expand...

Those investigative reporters would LOVE to hear about this. It is a story of discrimination and corruption in government, in a post 9/11 world. YOUR tax dollars at work, etc.

I would contact every news agency in every major city in washington. One coockie cutter email sent out to each one of them will result in their investigative reporters contacting DOL and asking questions. This will make the state crap their pants. Right now the state expects you to just sit there and take this BS like a good little subject, and most of you are falling for it because you think you have no rights as an immigrant. Nothing could be further fromt the truth.

A story going public about this BS is exactly what will light a fire under their asses to get this show on the road and start to find a way to begin processing licences once again.

After all, all other licensec that DOL puts through the same fingerprint and BG checks have remained unaffected. They do those checks the same way they do the AFL checks. But by some miracle in a post 9/11 world, only AFL licences have been affected...

That is a nice way of saying you are not trusted.

Originally Posted by Darth Muffin:
...Until then, the 14th amendment may not apply in your case. It says: "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."

Click to expand...

In the 1990 case United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990) the Supreme Court essentially ruled that non resident aliens are not protected by the Constitutional Amendments referring to “the people”. This means “the people” refers to “persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country.”

Originally Posted by awm:
I hesitantly broached the subject of legal permanent residents shooting at the range (with rented pistols of course since we can't have our own). The guy at Wade's assured me that it was okay do do so without an AFL. Apparently, it's not considered possession to shoot on their property. If however, I was to take the gun off their property then that would be possession and then I could be charged with a felony offense.

Click to expand...

This is why you may shoot MGs/Title II weapons in WA if the dealer who owns it is present. If they are present, they are still "in possession" of it, even if you are pulling the trigger (testing the merchandise).

IANAL, YMMV, Etc.

United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez ???

How you got that meaning I don't know?


United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990)[1], was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that Fourth Amendment protections do not apply to searches and seizures by United States agents of property owned by a nonresident alien in a foreign country


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Verdugo-Urquidez

United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez

The problem here is that this case is talking about non resident aliens and the lack of constitutional protections. However, many if not all of the people who are refused the Alien Firearms permit, and especially those posting here are resident aliens.

non resident aliens are not protected by the Constitutional Amendments referring to “the people”. This means “the people” refers to “persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country.”

Click to expand...

this case is talking about non resident aliens and the lack of constitutional protections. However, many if not all of the people who are refused the Alien Firearms permit, and especially those posting here are resident aliens.

Click to expand...

Correct. The SCOTUS disqualified non-resident aliens from constitutionally protected rights because they havn't developed "sufficient connections with this country" NOT BECAUSE they are not yet citizens.

So the SCOTUS is admitting that constitutionally protected rights MAY extend beyond just citizenship to those with "sufficient connection with this country".

To me, that makes a great legal argument IN SUPPORT of resident aliens (that have begun the process of naturalization) being covered by constitutionally protected rights. i.e. 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms

Am I welcome in Washington

Hi , I am an English shooter and have just obtained my green card for myself and my family after four years of hoops and expense . I am planning to move to Washington State early next year. Fell in love with it on my last visit and after much research (FindYourSpot.com ) I have a house in Florida but its too hot for us . I can buy what guns I like there and am intending to get my Florida CCW license . Am bringing kids over for their first visit in September as I have loose ends to tie up in England . Should I rethink because of this one issue .
Here in the UK we had a problem with the police not issuing firearms certificates renewals in time . In theory we would have been liable to a mandatory five years jail time for possession of a firearm without a valid license . However the police themselves would have been guilty of aiding and abetting the offense as they advised us that it was o.k . No prosecutions were forthcoming .
I will do all I can to help resolve this failure in law .

Hello Mr Willington . I just got an e- mail from Jim Moeller

He is a legislator and believes that as there was no opposition to the bill it has every chance of passing next session as in 2009 they meet for 120 days compared to only 60 in 2008 -which caused many bill to run out of time . I am thinking Annacortes ! I Dive and love the sea . I'd miss the rain out east .

Well the same bill didn't pass in 2007 when there were 120 days

You never know.. if it will even pass in the next session. Its just that keep pushing .. till it passes, don't put hopes on any sessions.

Google Chan VS City of Troy. AFL are discriminatory and unconstitutional even if you are not a citizen of the United States, ruled the court.

Just pushing it up so that it stays alive

Any word on this?