Why Not Washington (state?) and Oregon

[nitrogen]

I'll be travelling to Washington state and Oregon a lot for work in the next few months.

Any specific reason the Texas permit isn't honored in either of those two states?

[hirundo82]

I'm pretty sure Oregon doesn't have a provision for reciprocity with any other states--they do not honor any other permits.

I'm not sure why we don't have reciprocity with Washington. They do honor Utah's permit, if you want to get that.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Oregon doesn't issue non-resident CHL's, except to residents of contiguous states, so that's not an option. I don't know about Washington.

Chas.

[cxm]

Charles,

When I teach the Utah CCW course, the most common reason I get for people wanting the UT license is you get Washington, Minnesota and Alabama at the same time.

Of course you already have Utah with Texas... so it is the extra states for the most part.

Recently however, I have had several people take the course because it is so much cheaper than getting a Texas license. I tell these people I'm uneasy about a Texas resident trying to use a Utah license vice a Texas license and advise them to talk to the DPS for better information.

Today, one called me and said the DPS told him the Utah license was ok for him to use...but I'm still not convinced he explained the issues involved in sufficient detail to get a detailed answer... they just referred him to the reciprocial agreement on the DPS web site.

Anyway, one thing is sure, the demand for Utah licenses are way up.

FWIW

Chuck

Oregon doesn't issue non-resident CHL's, except to residents of contiguous states, so that's not an option. I don't know about Washington.

Chas.

[stevie_d_64]

Anyway, one thing is sure, the demand for Utah licenses are way up.

Even though I do not have a Utah license (yet), I am considering allowing my NH permit to lapse, and when I renew, only keep the Utah and Texas licenses current...Until something else happens that changes the equation...

The terms are 5 years for both now, and I gain a couple more states if I remember...It may be a little more money this way, but I believe I gain a lot more with this particular combo deal...

[IZinterrogator]

Washington will issue a non-resident CHL, I have one because my parents live there. It was $60 IIRC and it took about 15 minutes of paperwork and fingerprinting. I had my license in 30 days. The only problem I have with it is all changes must be made in person, so since I have moved and need to change my address, I have to travel to Washington to do it.

[diamondback]

I think I can summarize the Washington problem in four words: King County Democrat Machine. (In short, Seattle/Olympia.)

I know, I'm stuck up here in the belly of the beast.

The reciprocity statute requires that any state to be recognized by WA must match WA standards for issue requirements (not tighter than, not looser than, exact match or functionally so. The then-AG, now-Governess up here tried to interpret the statute such that no state would have qualified for reciprocity, until the Legislature slapped her into cooperation with their intent.

From http://www.atg.wa.gov/firearms/ :
"Washington’s Firearms and Dangerous Weapons statute (RCW 9.41) was amended in 2004 to allow non-Washington residents to carry concealed weapons in Washington if they have obtained a concealed weapons permit from another state that meets certain conditions imposed by Washington’s reciprocity law, RCW 9.41.073. Those conditions are:

1. The other state must have a reciprocal statute allowing Washington residents to carry concealed weapons in the other state if the resident has a Washington concealed pistol permit; and
2. The other state does not issue concealed pistol licenses to persons under twenty-one years of age; and
3. The state requires mandatory fingerprint-based background checks of criminal and mental health history for all persons who apply for a concealed pistol license.

If the above conditions are met, the concealed weapons permit of an out-of-state resident will be recognized in Washington as long as the permit holder does not become a resident of Washington State. Additionally, the permit holder from another state must carry the handgun in compliance with the laws of Washington State*. Washington concealed pistol permits will be recognized in those states which have the reciprocal agreements with Washington. Washington residents should check the laws of the state they are traveling to, in order to comply with the concealed weapons permit law of that state.

The new law requires the Office of Attorney General to periodically publish a list of states that meet the requirements for reciprocity. The list may be found by clicking here.

In 2004, the Office of the Attorney General sent out surveys to all 49 states and the District of Columbia to obtain the necessary information on each state’s concealed weapons permits. 48 states have responded. Of the 48 responses, there are seven states that qualify for reciprocity; 42 states that do not qualify. Connecticut and Maine have not responded to survey requests. Of the states that do not qualify for reciprocity, the most common reason is because the state does not have a reciprocity statute.

We send out an annual survey to request any updated information from each state. As we obtain updated responses we will update the list of reciprocal states. If you have questions about a specific state you may contact the Department of Licensing, Firearms Section at (360) 664-6616."

Thank God Washington had the brains to at least elect a Republican AG with Rob McKenna...

Hope this helps.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Diamondback:

Welcome to the forum and thanks for a great review of Washington's CHL statute. How long will you be exiled and where is home?

Chas.

[nitrogen]

1. The other state must have a reciprocal statute allowing Washington residents to carry concealed weapons in the other state if the resident has a Washington concealed pistol permit; and
2. The other state does not issue concealed pistol licenses to persons under twenty-one years of age; and
3. The state requires mandatory fingerprint-based background checks of criminal and mental health history for all persons who apply for a concealed pistol license.

Hope this helps.

From this, it sounds like Texas SHOULD qualify, shouldn't it, or does Texas's Military exemption for people under 21 kill the deal? Last I knew, Texas recognised Washington CHL's. Is there something else that's kept this from happening, or has Texas just not asked Washington state for it?

[diamondback]

Re my situation: I was hatched in the Seattle area, but my roots run from around El Paso. I consider San Antonio my spiritual "home", though, as an ancestor was present at the Alamo according to family legend. (I'm working on investigating this, unfortunately the family Bible is in the custody of someone I haven't exchanged civil words--or any other kind--with in over a decade and a half.) Duration is until I can finish college and support myself financially, and then if I'm succesful in getting into an ROTC program, whenever the Army sees fit to allow me.

It is my misfortune to have been born outside the lines on the map, but there has always been a sharp streak of Texas attitude to my personality, and with a road-trip to San Antonio last summer, it was love at first sight.

Re Washington: WA AG is supposed to review possible states every year, but even in spite of McKenna's conservatism and R (not that THAT means a whole lot...), the culture of WA AG office and the underlings is much more in line with Fraudoire's worldview. I also suspect that Washington's training non-requirement (it's pretty much "Are you a convicted felon? Are you mentally ill? No? OK, once the background check clears, we'll mail you your permit. Should be about 6-8 weeks...) and Texas requiring a training class are the incompatibility. Up here, anyone not in the above-mentioned categories can get a CPL, even foreign nationals if they get an Alien Firearms License first.

Hope this answers a few of everybody's questions.

[diamondback]

Apologies for the double-post, but since I can't edit, it's kind of necessary...

I also would suspect that the military exemption's a deal-breaker, too. Which makes no sense to me... They trust a man to pick up a battle-rifle or strap into an Apache or tank or stand watch in the launch-control center of a boomer and use some of the deadliest hardware known to man in defense of the country, but won't allow that same guy to possess a concealed weapon to defend himself and those he loves, just because of an arbitrary line on the calendar? This is like that joker in command of US Army Alaska...

OTOH, the lieberals in this state DO hate the military, look at all the ballots from Ft. Lewis residents they "by hook or by crook" DQ'ed back in '04.

*quiet fuming* I'm well over the "age line" myself, but it's the principle of the thing...