Memo Sent out to Hunter Ed Instructors on I-594

[Elk329]

This is a memo posted on Hunter Education Instructors Web page

State of Washington
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Mailing Address: 600 Capitol Way N, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
 
 
November 25, 2014
 
M E M O
To: Hunter Education Instructors
SUBJECT: INITIATIVE 594
 
I wanted to get you some information relative to Initiative 594, concerning background checks
for gun sales and transfers. As you know, the voters approved the initiative on November 4,
and the initiative will become effective on December 4 of this year.
Some of you have raised questions and concerns about potential effects of the initiative on the
Hunter Education Program. WDFW is assessing how the initiative relates to the Hunter
Education Program, and we expect to complete our assessment prior to the effective date of
the initiative.
We appreciate your interest, as well as your patience in this issue, and will provide information
as it becomes available, using the instructor’s web page.
Thank you for all that you do for the hunting public and the department. 

[Stein]

You have to pass the bill to find out what's in the bill.

Seems to be the going strategy lately when we let special interests draft legislation.

[timberfaller]

Liberalism is a disease and LIV'S are the virus that spreads it!!

Haven't seen my letter yet,  but its going to get to the point that we'll have to use paper cutouts for class!!!

I remember being told at a IST after the "hound/bear/trapping" bill that the WDFW was going to get "Pro-active" instead of "re-active" HAVEN'T seen it happen yet

[Bob33]

Good for them. They definitely need to give guidance on how this impacts the transfer of firearms with students, how it affects hunting, etc.

[lokidog]

It seems to hinge on the definition of the word "transfer".  The State Patrol indicated, in reference to the upcoming capitol protest, that a temporary handing over of a firearm would not be prosecuted as a transfer.  Of course, we all know that that could be changed any time.   

However, this fits right in with WDFWs agenda of getting real guns out of the classroom, they won't do anything to fight this.   

[ghosthunter]

I have said it before when the real guns go from class room than that is the end for me. No wonder we cant get new instructors the rules and process is out of control.

 

[Bob33]

However, this fits right in with WDFWs agenda of getting real guns out of the classroom, they won't do anything to fight this.   

We shall see, but I don't believe that's necessarily the case. They want to reduce liabliity, but they also want more hunters and if the HE program is waterered down too much they won't attract instructors and students. I think the legal/liability minded individuals at WDFW may like this, but I don't think the Hunter Education staff does.

[Fl0und3rz]

Haven't seen my letter yet,  but its going to get to the point that we'll have to use paper cutouts for class!!!

Make sure they use the proper handling procedures.

PEW PEW PEW!

It seems to hinge on the definition of the word "transfer".  The State Patrol indicated, in reference to the upcoming capitol protest, that a temporary handing over of a firearm would not be prosecuted as a transfer.

What the WSP is saying is that the prosecutor would be exercising prosecutorial discretion in not charging and prosecuting violations of I-594.  That is completely different from saying that the protest transfers are not in fact "transfers" that require background checks under I-594.  Not prosecuting is the worst possible situation with I-594, because it needs to be challenged.  Without an arrest, there might not be standing to sue based on the overbroad "transfer" requirement.


Under 18 would likely seem to be covered under 4(f)(ii) and (iv), whereas for a person 18 or over would require a background check, unless at an established shooting range under 4(f)(ii).

(ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located;

(iv) to a person who is under eighteen years of age for lawful hunting, sporting, or educational purposes while under the direct supervision and control of a responsible adult who is not prohibited from possessing firearms;

I'll be surprised if you get much more useful guidance than that.  Good luck guys/gals.

[timberfaller]

I have said it before when the real guns go from class room than that is the end for me. No wonder we cant get new instructors the rules and process is out of control.

 

Amen to That!! 

Feel sad for those who can't grasp reality and common sense eludes them!!

[Oldguy]

And what about the definition of a firearm that would include flare guns and nail guns. Background check for boaters purchasing required signal flares for their boats? What is considered a "reasonable fee" for FFL transfers and what is the definition of "transfer" in this bill?