MD_Willington
Member
We can hope, but we need to contact people, which ones? I'm not sure at this time.
All of them I guess.
All of them I guess.
NRA Lawsuit against Washington State
- Thread starter Sinixstar
- Start date
- Status
MD_Willington
Member
Here they are!
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/Default.aspx?Chamber=S
Eric Oemig has already stated he would support it... <-- I just bought a .22 rifle off his mother-in-law, small world eh!
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/Default.aspx?Chamber=S
Eric Oemig has already stated he would support it... <-- I just bought a .22 rifle off his mother-in-law, small world eh!
MD_Willington
Member
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)
IN THE SENATE
Mar 5 First reading, referred to Judiciary.
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)
IN THE SENATE
Mar 5 First reading, referred to Judiciary.
MD_Willington
Member
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
[email protected]
Representative Dennis Flannigan
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7930
[email protected]
Representative Timm Ormsby
Democrat
Spokane
(360) 786-7946
[email protected]
Representative Jay Rodne
Republican
North Bend
(360) 786-7852
[email protected]
Representative Mary Helen Roberts
Democrat
Lynnwood
(360) 786-7950
[email protected]
Representative Roger Goodman
Democrat
Kirkland
(360) 786-7878
[email protected]
Representative Troy Kelley
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7890
[email protected]
Representative Jamie Pedersen
Democrat
Seattle
(360) 786-7826
[email protected]
Representative Charles Ross
Republican
Naches
(360) 786-7856
[email protected]
Representative Judy Warnick
Republican
Moses Lake
(360) 786-7932
[email protected]
Representative Matthew Shea
Republican
Mead
(360) 786-7984
[email protected]
Representative Steve Kirby
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7996
[email protected]
Representative Dennis Flannigan
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7930
[email protected]
Representative Timm Ormsby
Democrat
Spokane
(360) 786-7946
[email protected]
Representative Jay Rodne
Republican
North Bend
(360) 786-7852
[email protected]
Representative Mary Helen Roberts
Democrat
Lynnwood
(360) 786-7950
[email protected]
Representative Roger Goodman
Democrat
Kirkland
(360) 786-7878
[email protected]
Representative Troy Kelley
Democrat
Tacoma
(360) 786-7890
[email protected]
Representative Jamie Pedersen
Democrat
Seattle
(360) 786-7826
[email protected]
Representative Charles Ross
Republican
Naches
(360) 786-7856
[email protected]
Representative Judy Warnick
Republican
Moses Lake
(360) 786-7932
[email protected]
Representative Matthew Shea
Republican
Mead
(360) 786-7984
[email protected]
Gungnir
Member
Aha, nope different committee, this is Senate Judiciary not House Judiciary.
Senator Room Phone
Kline, Adam (D) Chair (360) 786-7688
Regala, Debbie (D) (360) 786-7652
McCaslin, Bob (R) (360) 786-7606
Carrell, Mike (R) (360) 786-7654
Hargrove, James (D) (360) 786-7646
Kohl-Welles, Jeanne (D) (360) 786-7670
Roach, Pam (R) (360) 786-7660
Tom, Rodney (D) (360) 786-7694
Sorry I couldn't jump on this earlier, lets hope that they do their bit to uphold the COTUS
Senator Room Phone
Kline, Adam (D) Chair (360) 786-7688
Regala, Debbie (D) (360) 786-7652
McCaslin, Bob (R) (360) 786-7606
Carrell, Mike (R) (360) 786-7654
Hargrove, James (D) (360) 786-7646
Kohl-Welles, Jeanne (D) (360) 786-7670
Roach, Pam (R) (360) 786-7660
Tom, Rodney (D) (360) 786-7694
Sorry I couldn't jump on this earlier, lets hope that they do their bit to uphold the COTUS
Gungnir
Member
Actually I sent support mails to the entire senate the other day, so they should see this coming anyway.
MD_Willington
Member
Question on what to do next.
Hi guys, I have a question on how to proceed next.
I applied for an AFL just as they started issuing – end of January.
Next week it will be 1.5 months since I applied and still no license. I phoned DOL and they haven’t received the background check. I called the local PD and spoke with a lady who was pretty rude, basically said not to call again and to wait for it.
So I don’t know what to do next? Any advice?
Thanks
Hi guys, I have a question on how to proceed next.
I applied for an AFL just as they started issuing – end of January.
Next week it will be 1.5 months since I applied and still no license. I phoned DOL and they haven’t received the background check. I called the local PD and spoke with a lady who was pretty rude, basically said not to call again and to wait for it.
So I don’t know what to do next? Any advice?
Thanks
MD_Willington
Member
Start bugging DOL.. they have to issue it.
Diamondback6
Member
Do you send it on to DOL or does the LEO? If the former, I suggest that future send-ins should be Certified or Return Receipt Requested from the Post Office, so if they say "not received" you can quote "USPS says delivered at XYZ time on ABC date, and I have the Return Receipt to prove it."
Just remember, passive-aggressive reprisals like "lost paperwork" are part and parcel of how the apparatchiki deal with those whom they do not like or who refuse to properly bend over and spread cheeks for them...
Just remember, passive-aggressive reprisals like "lost paperwork" are part and parcel of how the apparatchiki deal with those whom they do not like or who refuse to properly bend over and spread cheeks for them...
Gungnir
Member
Ok, to clear up the system.
You send a letter to the DOL with your evidence of residency and a copy of your paperwork proving you a legal alien. Also any required evidence of good character if needed.
Then you appear at your local Sheriff for fingerprinting and background check. The Sheriff is the one that sends this to the DOL. KCSO in particular have an issue due to some stupid internal financial efficiency that requires Background checks to be sent in order received and in a block. So if someone's background check is taking time on the same day that you filed your paperwork, its sent when the last one received that day is complete. All others will be racking up behind, and might get there the same time as the day previous, or week previous depending on the delay of one of the applications before yours.
I got mine released by banging on the door a lot. Spoke to the Records manager, and got an exception with mine, since this was an exception it could be that all KCSO AFL's are still piled up behind the two other AFL requests that were filed the same day as mine (jan 29th), it's a stupid rule.
I've tried to explain to the DOL that how they perform the completion of the AFL is not my problem but theirs, and that they must comply with the injunction, that didn't go down so well
I think they're actually screwing up, but not maliciously. They got flooded (obviously) and don't particularly like to be called on the fact that they have suppressed constitutional rights for about 4 years. My AFL is apparently in the mail (yeah like the check) it's been a week or so, I'll check my Mail box again tomorrow, my application was on the 29th, if it's not there then, then they might be getting a call from me, my lawyer, or perhaps the Judge depending on what my lawyer does.
You send a letter to the DOL with your evidence of residency and a copy of your paperwork proving you a legal alien. Also any required evidence of good character if needed.
Then you appear at your local Sheriff for fingerprinting and background check. The Sheriff is the one that sends this to the DOL. KCSO in particular have an issue due to some stupid internal financial efficiency that requires Background checks to be sent in order received and in a block. So if someone's background check is taking time on the same day that you filed your paperwork, its sent when the last one received that day is complete. All others will be racking up behind, and might get there the same time as the day previous, or week previous depending on the delay of one of the applications before yours.
I got mine released by banging on the door a lot. Spoke to the Records manager, and got an exception with mine, since this was an exception it could be that all KCSO AFL's are still piled up behind the two other AFL requests that were filed the same day as mine (jan 29th), it's a stupid rule.
I've tried to explain to the DOL that how they perform the completion of the AFL is not my problem but theirs, and that they must comply with the injunction, that didn't go down so well
I think they're actually screwing up, but not maliciously. They got flooded (obviously) and don't particularly like to be called on the fact that they have suppressed constitutional rights for about 4 years. My AFL is apparently in the mail (yeah like the check) it's been a week or so, I'll check my Mail box again tomorrow, my application was on the 29th, if it's not there then, then they might be getting a call from me, my lawyer, or perhaps the Judge depending on what my lawyer does.
Gungnir
What was the DOL's response when you told them they must abide by the injunction? I understand they didn't like it, but what did they say to it?
I sent my application on Feb. 20th to the DOL and had the main KCSO do my background check the same day. KCSO also cashed my check a few days later. Was hoping that I would receive it early (yeah right :banghead
, but now am worried I won't even see it by March 20 with what's been posted here. Sad that I can't really even call in until the 30 days are up.
When I had by fingerprints and background check done, I asked how long it might take, hoping that they might actually be ahead of the game. She matter of factly said that IT WILL be 30 days. Like it really didn't matter if I was the only one in line, they were going to drag it out as long as they could.
What was the DOL's response when you told them they must abide by the injunction? I understand they didn't like it, but what did they say to it?
I sent my application on Feb. 20th to the DOL and had the main KCSO do my background check the same day. KCSO also cashed my check a few days later. Was hoping that I would receive it early (yeah right :banghead
, but now am worried I won't even see it by March 20 with what's been posted here. Sad that I can't really even call in until the 30 days are up.When I had by fingerprints and background check done, I asked how long it might take, hoping that they might actually be ahead of the game. She matter of factly said that IT WILL be 30 days. Like it really didn't matter if I was the only one in line, they were going to drag it out as long as they could.
I also asked them about the 30 day rule and they told me that they can't issue without a background check, now in the injunction it says otherwise but....what can we do.
They also said the 30 day rule is for the background check to be complete, doesn't include the time it takes then to send in the application to DOL.
Edit: They also said that different PD finance departments, have different rules on when to send the complete application, some do it once or twice a month.
They also said the 30 day rule is for the background check to be complete, doesn't include the time it takes then to send in the application to DOL.
Edit: They also said that different PD finance departments, have different rules on when to send the complete application, some do it once or twice a month.
Last edited:
MD_Willington
Member
I'll email the lawyer tomorrow and ask them about contact info...
Here is what I have
800-392-8683 - NRA ILA
800-392-8683 - SAF
(206) 621-1320 [email protected] - Carl Carlson (Attorney for plaintiffs) - I got this from the files posted on here about the lawsuit.
800-392-8683 - NRA ILA
800-392-8683 - SAF
(206) 621-1320 [email protected] - Carl Carlson (Attorney for plaintiffs) - I got this from the files posted on here about the lawsuit.
MD_Willington
Member
That's the one.
I was asked if anyone was having a hard time at getting the AFL, to contact Adrian... but if you want to go ahead and contact the lawyer directly, it should be alright.
I was asked if anyone was having a hard time at getting the AFL, to contact Adrian... but if you want to go ahead and contact the lawyer directly, it should be alright.
Gungnir
Member
Basically result was the same as dtrBG claiming that they can't issue without a background check. To which I flippantly replied, I've had an FBI background check for my H1-B, marital Green Card, Conversion to Unconditional Green Card, and in the process of a Background check for Naturalization. Which one of these do they believe that the FBI was possibly wrong with.
I mentioned that the terms of the injunction basically made the AFL a Shall issue license, unless evidence the the contrary the license shall be issued. They explained that the FBI background check was a problem, which is when I explained that how they implemented the system was not my problem, my problem was with them, as yet, not issuing.
That was a couple of weeks ago before I blew the doors of KCSO, so maybe I should call them again
Of course according to the DOL the "AFL is in the post".- Status
