musher
Member
Well, I just got off the phone with Bill Forth of the firearms desk at the department of licensing for WA state. My non-resident concealed pistol permit for WA state expired in November, and I've been running around trying to get the dang thing renewed.
I got the original permit by mail from the Seattle police department. When I called them for a renewal form, they told me that they A) don't process permits for anyone except Seattle residents and B) that I'd have to travel to WA to apply for my renewal in person.
I eventually got directed to the department of Licensing. To their credit, they promised Mr Forth would call me and he did so promptly. What he had to say didn't make me happy however.
According to him, no police agencies in WA state can issue or renew permits by mail because you have to show up in person. When I pointed out that the 'in person' requirement wasn't in statute and asked him to point me to an AG opinion or court case that established that requirement, he said that the reason mail-in applications couldn't be accepted is that the statute didn't specifically authorize applications by mail.
Now, since the statute doesn't speak to whether or not applications are made in person, it seems to me you could just as easily argue that you can ONLY apply by mail since the statute doesn't authorize in person applications. The exact wording of the statute is
(13) A person may apply for a concealed pistol license:
(a) To the municipality or to the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in a municipality;
(b) To the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in an unincorporated area; or
(c) Anywhere in the state if the applicant is a nonresident.
Seems to me that an in person application requirement should be worded as 'apply at' such and such an agency.
Mr Forth, further argued that anarchy would result if folks were allowed to sign their applications out of sight of the issuing agencies. I'm not sure if that was his opinion or a somewhat more official explanation, but my explanation of the notary process seemed to go over his head.
I never did get a straight answer as to how to locate the interpretation of the statute that precludes mail in applications. Mr Forth took exception to my question of who interpreted the statute and whether it was a court or AG opinion. If anyone knows, I'd be interested in looking it up
My 90 day window to renew my permit will slip away at the end of February and my next trip to WA isn't until July, so I guess I've got to make time to make a brand new application when I'm down there, and go without a permit until my next trip after that.
No real point to this, I guess, except to gripe about what seems like essentially arbitrary interpretations of statutes that seem pretty clear to me.
If anyone knows of a way I can get renewed w/o buying a $500 plane ticket, I'm all ears. Also, if anyone in WA knows more about this situation, I'd appreciate an explanation of how this 'in-person' requirement came about since 2001 when I obtained my original license.
The relevant statute is at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.070
I got the original permit by mail from the Seattle police department. When I called them for a renewal form, they told me that they A) don't process permits for anyone except Seattle residents and B) that I'd have to travel to WA to apply for my renewal in person.
I eventually got directed to the department of Licensing. To their credit, they promised Mr Forth would call me and he did so promptly. What he had to say didn't make me happy however.
According to him, no police agencies in WA state can issue or renew permits by mail because you have to show up in person. When I pointed out that the 'in person' requirement wasn't in statute and asked him to point me to an AG opinion or court case that established that requirement, he said that the reason mail-in applications couldn't be accepted is that the statute didn't specifically authorize applications by mail.
Now, since the statute doesn't speak to whether or not applications are made in person, it seems to me you could just as easily argue that you can ONLY apply by mail since the statute doesn't authorize in person applications. The exact wording of the statute is
(13) A person may apply for a concealed pistol license:
(a) To the municipality or to the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in a municipality;
(b) To the county in which the applicant resides if the applicant resides in an unincorporated area; or
(c) Anywhere in the state if the applicant is a nonresident.
Seems to me that an in person application requirement should be worded as 'apply at' such and such an agency.
Mr Forth, further argued that anarchy would result if folks were allowed to sign their applications out of sight of the issuing agencies. I'm not sure if that was his opinion or a somewhat more official explanation, but my explanation of the notary process seemed to go over his head.
I never did get a straight answer as to how to locate the interpretation of the statute that precludes mail in applications. Mr Forth took exception to my question of who interpreted the statute and whether it was a court or AG opinion. If anyone knows, I'd be interested in looking it up
My 90 day window to renew my permit will slip away at the end of February and my next trip to WA isn't until July, so I guess I've got to make time to make a brand new application when I'm down there, and go without a permit until my next trip after that.
No real point to this, I guess, except to gripe about what seems like essentially arbitrary interpretations of statutes that seem pretty clear to me.
If anyone knows of a way I can get renewed w/o buying a $500 plane ticket, I'm all ears. Also, if anyone in WA knows more about this situation, I'd appreciate an explanation of how this 'in-person' requirement came about since 2001 when I obtained my original license.
The relevant statute is at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.070
