Forum rules
Nothing contained in this section shall be construed as legal advice. All members and guests are advised to perform due diligence in regards to laws and legal actions.Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way Soon
Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:29 am
As it stands currently, a person who wants to purchase (legally) a handgun from another person
In WA state, must complete a federal ATF form 4473 and a WA state Pistol Transfer Application (PTA), then
undergo a background check before taking possession of the handgun. Whether the purchaser has
a Concealed Pistol License (CPL) or not has some bearing on the exact procedure, and may induce a waiting
period if a CPL is not held by the purchaser. The FFL must record the firearm coming in and going out, check
identification, complete the 4473 form and PTA, log the PTA information electronically in the state online licensing system, and store the 4473 for up to 20 years. For 45-60 minutes of work, the FFL is awarded
the fee collected at the time of transfer. Some charge upwards and beyond $50, my shop charges significantly less, in the interest of reducing the impact of I-594 on my fellow gun owners.
Back in March, velillen reported on HB 1501 in this thread: http://www.waguns.org/viewtopic.php?f=137&t=79121&hilit=1501
Along comes WA House Bill 1501, passed by the legislature and signed by our liberal governor, to take effect July 23. Without quoting the entire bill here, let me throw in some highlights, taken from the bill as passed. The bill will eventually by codified into the RCW’s.
“AN ACT Relating to protecting law enforcement and the public from persons who illegally attempt to obtain firearms; reenacting and amending RCW 42.56.240; adding a new section to chapter 9.41 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 36.28A RCW; and adding a new section to chapter 43.43 RCW.”
A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW as follows:
(1) A dealer shall report to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs [WHO are these jokers?] information on each instance where the dealer denies an application for the purchase or transfer of a firearm….as the result of a background check or completed and submitted firearm purchase or transfer application that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law. The dealer shall report the denied application information to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs within five days of the denial in a format as prescribed by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs [duplicated work and forms sent to another psuedo government agency]. The reported information must include the identifying information of the applicant, the date of the application and denial of the application, and other information or documents as prescribed by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs. In any case where the purchase or transfer of a firearm is initially denied by the dealer as the result of a background check that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm, but the purchase or transfer is subsequently approved, the dealer shall report the subsequent approval to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs within one day of the approval. [Each of these steps is already a requirement of the state Firearms Licensing System, except for the shortened time frame to 1 day, which adds to the FFL’s burdensome work load.]
(2) Upon denying an application for the purchase or transfer of a firearm as a result of a background check or completed and submitted firearm purchase or transfer application that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law, the dealer shall:
(a) Provide the applicant with a copy of a notice form generated and distributed by the Washington State Patrol (WSP) under section 3(5) of this act, informing denied applicants of their right to appeal the denial; and [no doubt this will be yet another form that the WSP requires, but cannot manage to distribute or log correctly].
(b) Retain the original records of the attempted purchase or transfer of a firearm for a period not less than six years.
But wait..the fun continues…
A new section is added to chapter 36.28A RCW to read as follows:
(1) Subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for this specific purpose, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs must create and maintain an electronic portal for a dealer, as defined in RCW 9.41.010, to report the information as required pursuant to section 1 of this act pertaining to persons who have applied for the purchase or transfer of a firearm and were denied as the result of a background check or completed and submitted firearm purchase or transfer application that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law. [Yet another poorly designed and run state database that will not be maintained, and will be fraught with bugs and the inability to log the information]
(2) Upon receipt of information from a dealer pursuant to section 1 of this act that a person originally denied the purchase or transfer of a firearm as the result of a background check that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm has subsequently been approved for the purchase or transfer, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs must purge any record of the person's denial in its possession and inform the Washington state patrol and any local law enforcement agency… [Is anyone fooled into thinking this will actually be carried out in an accurate and speedy fashion?]
The bill goes on to discuss information sharing between WSP and the various Indian tribes and other law enforcement agencies. There is a section pertaining to public records requests and redacted data. But in essence, all this bill does is place more work on the heads of gun dealers and duplicate work which the state and federal laws already in place are supposed to accomplish. This is a fine example of how the state continues to infringe on your gun rights.
With the increased burden in forms, record storage, and electronic entries required by the new bill, you can bet the cost will be passed along to the customer. Not many of us can afford to work for free, and FFL’s were already under a burdensome work load when processing a pistol transfer.
Look for an increase in those transfer fees, they will be coming to a dealer near you.
In WA state, must complete a federal ATF form 4473 and a WA state Pistol Transfer Application (PTA), then
undergo a background check before taking possession of the handgun. Whether the purchaser has
a Concealed Pistol License (CPL) or not has some bearing on the exact procedure, and may induce a waiting
period if a CPL is not held by the purchaser. The FFL must record the firearm coming in and going out, check
identification, complete the 4473 form and PTA, log the PTA information electronically in the state online licensing system, and store the 4473 for up to 20 years. For 45-60 minutes of work, the FFL is awarded
the fee collected at the time of transfer. Some charge upwards and beyond $50, my shop charges significantly less, in the interest of reducing the impact of I-594 on my fellow gun owners.
Back in March, velillen reported on HB 1501 in this thread: http://www.waguns.org/viewtopic.php?f=137&t=79121&hilit=1501
Along comes WA House Bill 1501, passed by the legislature and signed by our liberal governor, to take effect July 23. Without quoting the entire bill here, let me throw in some highlights, taken from the bill as passed. The bill will eventually by codified into the RCW’s.
“AN ACT Relating to protecting law enforcement and the public from persons who illegally attempt to obtain firearms; reenacting and amending RCW 42.56.240; adding a new section to chapter 9.41 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 36.28A RCW; and adding a new section to chapter 43.43 RCW.”
A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW as follows:
(1) A dealer shall report to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs [WHO are these jokers?] information on each instance where the dealer denies an application for the purchase or transfer of a firearm….as the result of a background check or completed and submitted firearm purchase or transfer application that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law. The dealer shall report the denied application information to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs within five days of the denial in a format as prescribed by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs [duplicated work and forms sent to another psuedo government agency]. The reported information must include the identifying information of the applicant, the date of the application and denial of the application, and other information or documents as prescribed by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs. In any case where the purchase or transfer of a firearm is initially denied by the dealer as the result of a background check that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm, but the purchase or transfer is subsequently approved, the dealer shall report the subsequent approval to the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs within one day of the approval. [Each of these steps is already a requirement of the state Firearms Licensing System, except for the shortened time frame to 1 day, which adds to the FFL’s burdensome work load.]
(2) Upon denying an application for the purchase or transfer of a firearm as a result of a background check or completed and submitted firearm purchase or transfer application that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law, the dealer shall:
(a) Provide the applicant with a copy of a notice form generated and distributed by the Washington State Patrol (WSP) under section 3(5) of this act, informing denied applicants of their right to appeal the denial; and [no doubt this will be yet another form that the WSP requires, but cannot manage to distribute or log correctly].
(b) Retain the original records of the attempted purchase or transfer of a firearm for a period not less than six years.
But wait..the fun continues…
A new section is added to chapter 36.28A RCW to read as follows:
(1) Subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for this specific purpose, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs must create and maintain an electronic portal for a dealer, as defined in RCW 9.41.010, to report the information as required pursuant to section 1 of this act pertaining to persons who have applied for the purchase or transfer of a firearm and were denied as the result of a background check or completed and submitted firearm purchase or transfer application that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law. [Yet another poorly designed and run state database that will not be maintained, and will be fraught with bugs and the inability to log the information]
(2) Upon receipt of information from a dealer pursuant to section 1 of this act that a person originally denied the purchase or transfer of a firearm as the result of a background check that indicates the applicant is ineligible to possess a firearm has subsequently been approved for the purchase or transfer, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs must purge any record of the person's denial in its possession and inform the Washington state patrol and any local law enforcement agency… [Is anyone fooled into thinking this will actually be carried out in an accurate and speedy fashion?]
The bill goes on to discuss information sharing between WSP and the various Indian tribes and other law enforcement agencies. There is a section pertaining to public records requests and redacted data. But in essence, all this bill does is place more work on the heads of gun dealers and duplicate work which the state and federal laws already in place are supposed to accomplish. This is a fine example of how the state continues to infringe on your gun rights.
With the increased burden in forms, record storage, and electronic entries required by the new bill, you can bet the cost will be passed along to the customer. Not many of us can afford to work for free, and FFL’s were already under a burdensome work load when processing a pistol transfer.
Look for an increase in those transfer fees, they will be coming to a dealer near you.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:09 pm
Fuckers won't be happy until all gun owners are considered criminals by their law.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:45 pm
Private organization, have no idea why dealers have to report to them or if it's even legal.
About WASPC
WASPC is an acronym for the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs. The association was founded in 1963 and consists of executive and top management personnel from law enforcement agencies statewide. Our membership includes sheriffs, police chiefs, the Washington State Patrol, the Washington Department of Corrections, and representatives of a number of federal agencies. WASPC is governed by its executive board.
About WASPC
WASPC is an acronym for the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs. The association was founded in 1963 and consists of executive and top management personnel from law enforcement agencies statewide. Our membership includes sheriffs, police chiefs, the Washington State Patrol, the Washington Department of Corrections, and representatives of a number of federal agencies. WASPC is governed by its executive board.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:53 pm
Guntrader wrote:Private organization, have no idea why dealers have to report to them or if it's even legal.
About WASPC
WASPC is an acronym for the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs. The association was founded in 1963 and consists of executive and top management personnel from law enforcement agencies statewide. Our membership includes sheriffs, police chiefs, the Washington State Patrol, the Washington Department of Corrections, and representatives of a number of federal agencies. WASPC is governed by its executive board.
That was exactly my thought as I was reading the OP. Is WASPC even fall under the pervue of FOIA?
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:57 pm
To be fair I didn't really "report it". Just shared the message I got from my Rep. who talked about it :)
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:24 pm
My major concern besides legality and such......
It's a private organization where members have to be approved by a board.
If they don't like your politics....denied. Easy to stack the deck.
I belong to a couple crimefighter organizations similar to this, and there are a lot of rules that are never followed or simply ignored.
I saw guy named as a board director and he was just there as a guest, buddy of his was a board member and had friends.
It's a private organization where members have to be approved by a board.
If they don't like your politics....denied. Easy to stack the deck.
I belong to a couple crimefighter organizations similar to this, and there are a lot of rules that are never followed or simply ignored.
I saw guy named as a board director and he was just there as a guest, buddy of his was a board member and had friends.
Massivedesign wrote:Guntrader wrote:Private organization, have no idea why dealers have to report to them or if it's even legal.
About WASPC
WASPC is an acronym for the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs. The association was founded in 1963 and consists of executive and top management personnel from law enforcement agencies statewide. Our membership includes sheriffs, police chiefs, the Washington State Patrol, the Washington Department of Corrections, and representatives of a number of federal agencies. WASPC is governed by its executive board.
That was exactly my thought as I was reading the OP. Is WASPC even fall under the pervue of FOIA?
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:28 pm
Thanks for the info, Guntrader.
I am all in for law enforcement, but turning something this sensitive over to a psuedo state "agency" / association is not my idea of transparency in government.
golddigger14 also posted something about HB1501 in the 2A forum.
I am all in for law enforcement, but turning something this sensitive over to a psuedo state "agency" / association is not my idea of transparency in government.
golddigger14 also posted something about HB1501 in the 2A forum.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Sun Jul 30, 2017 8:01 am
POC already processed the PTA and issues the denial so why make the dealer do anything? Tell the POC what they already know?
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:09 am
SporkBoy wrote:POC already processed the PTA and issues the denial so why make the dealer do anything? Tell the POC what they already know?
State POC or NICS may find something local LEO doesn't see, they are using WASPC as a clearing house to try to investigate denials.
However, this is a shitty idea. It should go to WSP for a first pass and referral to local LEO like Oregon does.
I would trust WASPC admin to wipe their own butts. I'll ask the sheriff or cmd staff about this when I see them.
My summary: not bad, and not good.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:11 am
Does it direct any funds to WASPC?
(fyi WASPC is pronounced "wass-pic")
(fyi WASPC is pronounced "wass-pic")
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:16 am
Why wouldn't they just add an additional fee for denied 4473? I don't see how this affects all gun transfers if it only relates to denials.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:21 am
True, sinus211...FFL's should not punish everyone for the transgression(?) of a denial here and there.
The problem is that there is very little leverage the FFL has in charging a fee once the BGC is denied. All the company policies and invoices in the world won't force someone to pay a fee in exchange for "nothing but grief and turning me in to the cops".
Additionally, whereas failure to pay for a firearm could be considered theft, I doubt LE would take the same view on failure to pay for a transfer fee.
At the end of the day, look how much transfer fees jumped in response to I-594. I expect there will be an increase as result of this law as well.
The problem is that there is very little leverage the FFL has in charging a fee once the BGC is denied. All the company policies and invoices in the world won't force someone to pay a fee in exchange for "nothing but grief and turning me in to the cops".
Additionally, whereas failure to pay for a firearm could be considered theft, I doubt LE would take the same view on failure to pay for a transfer fee.
At the end of the day, look how much transfer fees jumped in response to I-594. I expect there will be an increase as result of this law as well.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:49 pm
We charge a fee if you get denied. takes about 5 min to submit it to the sheriffs association. and provide them with the nics number, who denied them and its all up to them to clear it up.
they are even receptive on how to make it easier for dealers to submit.
they are even receptive on how to make it easier for dealers to submit.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:30 am
3584ELK wrote:True, sinus211...FFL's should not punish everyone for the transgression(?) of a denial here and there.
The problem is that there is very little leverage the FFL has in charging a fee once the BGC is denied. All the company policies and invoices in the world won't force someone to pay a fee in exchange for "nothing but grief and turning me in to the cops".
Additionally, whereas failure to pay for a firearm could be considered theft, I doubt LE would take the same view on failure to pay for a transfer fee.
At the end of the day, look how much transfer fees jumped in response to I-594. I expect there will be an increase as result of this law as well.
That's true, I hadn't considered the unhappy patron after the denial. Maybe if the dealer says "hey you got denied, you pay a $100 fee or I call the cops right now." Denied party pays their $100 blackmail/fee and walks out the door. The FFL then promptly proceeds to turn in the individual anyway.
It would be kind of a shady practice but I guess felons trying to buy guns shouldn't really be complaining about shady practices.
Re: Passage of HB 1501=Higher Transfer Fees Headed Your Way
Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:39 am
sinus211 wrote:3584ELK wrote:True, sinus211...FFL's should not punish everyone for the transgression(?) of a denial here and there.
The problem is that there is very little leverage the FFL has in charging a fee once the BGC is denied. All the company policies and invoices in the world won't force someone to pay a fee in exchange for "nothing but grief and turning me in to the cops".
Additionally, whereas failure to pay for a firearm could be considered theft, I doubt LE would take the same view on failure to pay for a transfer fee.
At the end of the day, look how much transfer fees jumped in response to I-594. I expect there will be an increase as result of this law as well.
That's true, I hadn't considered the unhappy patron after the denial. Maybe if the dealer says "hey you got denied, you pay a $100 fee or I call the cops right now." Denied party pays their $100 blackmail/fee and walks out the door. The FFL then promptly proceeds to turn in the individual anyway.
It would be kind of a shady practice but I guess felons trying to buy guns shouldn't really be complaining about shady practices.
If I got denied and was blackmailed on the spot, I would say, "call 'em... NOW!" and I wouldn't leave until they showed.