WDFW final recommendations for 2009-11

[Alpine Mojo]

The way I read it, you don't need your CPL to carry concealed while your outside recreating.  I let mine expire a couple of years ago for this reason.  No need to shell out another $50 to renew my name in their database.

RCW 9.41.060

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.060

"The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 (carry, including concealed) shall not apply to...
 ...Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area"

[Jerbear]

I think the CWP is because some folks have felony records, and they can hunt with bows, but still not allowed by law to have a firearm. 

[bowhuntin]

The way I read it, you don't need your CPL to carry concealed while your outside recreating.  I let mine expire a couple of years ago for this reason.  No need to shell out another $50 to renew my name in their database.

RCW 9.41.060

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.060

"The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 (carry, including concealed) shall not apply to...
 ...Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area"

Reading the RCW makes more sense than what they have in the final recommendations. Leave it to the WDFW to confuse people.

I think the CWP is because some folks have felony records, and they can hunt with bows, but still not allowed by law to have a firearm. 

Jerbear that is also what I was thinking, but them having a gun even if they weren't hunting is breaking the law because of their felony conviction.

[Kain]

They will be taking public comment on this issue after 1pm on the 4th.  Can anyone make it to bring up the contradicting RCW?

[MichaelJ]

The main reason for them requiring a CWP for carrying during archery seasons is their concern for people dispatching wounded game with their handgun.  They don't want every joe somebody up on the mountain with a bow carrying a pistol, they wanted a way to 'try' to ensure that those carrying were going to be ethical about it.  They took input from the public and decided that 'most' of those with a CWP will be ethical in how they use their pistol during archery season.  Makes sense to me.

Michael

[Kain]

So they should just assume that we are all unethical until we prove we are not?  I think it should be the other way around.  I cant believe people are OK with this stuff.  They continue to create more rules and regulations (that they cant enforce) that will only effect ethical people and will have little to no effect on unethical or criminal people. 

[Machias]

That makes NO sense and how can that be Constitutional??  Sounds to me like they are invoking a rule only to generate revenue for the state.  If I don't carry my handgun concealed I should not need a concealed carry permit.  There is already a exception to the concealed carry law if you are recreating in the outdoors.  This RCW is in conflict with another RCW.

RCW 9.41.060
Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms. 

The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:

     (1) Marshals, sheriffs, prison or jail wardens or their deputies, or other law enforcement officers of this state or another state;

     (2) Members of the armed forces of the United States or of the national guard or organized reserves, when on duty;

     (3) Officers or employees of the United States duly authorized to carry a concealed pistol;

     (4) Any person engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing, or dealing in firearms, or the agent or representative of the person, if possessing, using, or carrying a pistol in the usual or ordinary course of the business;

     (5) Regularly enrolled members of any organization duly authorized to purchase or receive pistols from the United States or from this state;

     (6) Regularly enrolled members of clubs organized for the purpose of target shooting, when those members are at or are going to or from their places of target practice;

     (7) Regularly enrolled members of clubs organized for the purpose of modern and antique firearm collecting, when those members are at or are going to or from their collector's gun shows and exhibits;

     ( 8 ) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area;

     (9) Any person while carrying a pistol unloaded and in a closed opaque case or secure wrapper; or

     (10) Law enforcement officers retired for service or physical disabilities, except for those law enforcement officers retired because of mental or stress-related disabilities. This subsection applies only to a retired officer who has: (a) Obtained documentation from a law enforcement agency within Washington state from which he or she retired that is signed by the agency's chief law enforcement officer and that states that the retired officer was retired for service or physical disability; and (b) not been convicted or found not guilty by reason of insanity of a crime making him or her ineligible for a concealed pistol license.


[2005 c 453 § 3; 1998 c 253 § 2; 1996 c 295 § 5; 1995 c 392 § 1; 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 406; 1961 c 124 § 5; 1935 c 172 § 6; RRS § 2516-6.]


Notes:
     Severability -- 2005 c 453: See note following RCW 9.41.040.

     Finding -- Intent -- Severability -- 1994 sp.s. c 7: See notes following RCW 43.70.540.


     Effective date -- 1994 sp.s. c 7 §§ 401-410, 413-416, 418-437, and 439-460: See note following RCW 9.41.010.

[nw_bowhunter]

Having the CWP is a good thing but has nothing to do with ethics, or if someone will use the gun to dispatch the wounded animal. I do not agree with that one bit.

[Machias]

The main reason for them requiring a CWP for carrying during archery seasons is their concern for people dispatching wounded game with their handgun.  They don't want every joe somebody up on the mountain with a bow carrying a pistol, they wanted a way to 'try' to ensure that those carrying were going to be ethical about it.  They took input from the public and decided that 'most' of those with a CWP will be ethical in how they use their pistol during archery season.  Makes sense to me.

Michael

I'm not attacking you, but it makes no sense to me.  How will a CWP stop someone who would use a weapon to dispatch an animal?  It won't.  Obtaining a CWP does not make a person more ethical then someone without a CWP.

[MichaelJ]

The main reason for them requiring a CWP for carrying during archery seasons is their concern for people dispatching wounded game with their handgun.  They don't want every joe somebody up on the mountain with a bow carrying a pistol, they wanted a way to 'try' to ensure that those carrying were going to be ethical about it.  They took input from the public and decided that 'most' of those with a CWP will be ethical in how they use their pistol during archery season.  Makes sense to me.

Michael

I'm not attacking you, but it makes no sense to me.  How will a CWP stop someone who would use a weapon to dispatch an animal?  It won't.  Obtaining a CWP does not make a person more ethical then someone without a CWP.

Understood... However maybe Aaron can chime in, he was at the meeting as well...
Here is how I look at it...
'Most' poachers and unethical people out there have very little regard for rules/regulations, I would be very surprised if most poachers out there had pistols that they carried with them without a CWP because they just don't care about the law.  it seems to me that anybody who is willing to go through the process of getting a CWP is less likely to abuse their rights than someone who hasn't.

I know that the commissioner made a statement during the Eburg meeting much like "Now I know that I am never without my 44 mag while archery hunting in Montana.  There's too many things out there that I'm scared of..." (it was a pretty funny remark, but you could tell he was for the carrying of pistols during archery seasons).  They just want a way to be able to regulate it, and try to keep people from using them in ways other than intended...

Michael

[Kain]

I understand where they are coming from but there is already a rule that says you cannot use a weapon different than your tag to dispatch wounded game.  Including the CWP requirement will do nothing to stop the people that would do this anyways. 

[Machias]

How do you think they will solve the conflict between the two RCWs?  I just think they are setting themselves up for litigation.   

[bobcat]

A person is well within their rights to carry a concealed handgun while hunting, permit or not. So just go ahead and do it. The new law makes absolutely no sense. A person hunting with a rifle during rifle season is allowed to carry a concealed weapon. The new law is meant to allow an archery hunter to do the same. You should not need a permit in order to do something that is a right granted to all of us by the 2nd amendment.

[bowhuntin]

I was kind of thinking that people spoke up that are against a person having a sidearm during the archery season and didn't want them at all. By them including the wording of having to have a CWP this would somehow stop more people from carrying. I know there are people out there that think guns have no place in the archery woods and they think if you feel the need to carry you should hunt modern firearm.

[Kain]

I dont think I should have to give up my rights to carry just because I choose to buy an archery deer tag.  I guess I just dont understand why people think they should limit someones rights just because they might break the law.  This is what the gun control crowd believes also.  You take away someones rights AFTER they have broken the law.  The idea that hunters would support gun control on one of their own seems crazy to me.  The same guys that would scream bloody murder if they were not allowed to carry a handgun while rifle hunting think its fine to do it to an archery or muzzle load hunter?