So I'm in another thread in GD, and have been told I'm wrong on the law. The topic came about carrying a AR pistol legal in a car vs a SBR. I had a friend who was pulled over by the WSP one time and was almost ticketed for carrying a loaded weapon in a car. He had a MKE MP5K, loaded but he actually had a holster for it. Anyway trooper said it was not legal off his person and the law clearly states that, but he convinced the trooper he really did carry it, showed him the holster and told him he took it off for comfort. The trooper than informed him it was a awfully large "pistol" to try and conceal, but the law is the law. He then said that law as written specifically says on your person. The only time it can be in there off your person is when your out of the vehicle and the pistol is locked inside out of side. Another WA member said the trooper was wrong but when I read the RCW, it looks pretty clear it's on your person. So what is it?RCW here

(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, 

Seems pretty clear... If you have a license...and the licensee is within the vehicle at all times the pistol is there... Good to go. 

No, it says on (i) the pistol is on the licensee's person,(ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times the pistol is there.
There in lies the confusion, my friend consulted a lawyer after the fact and he said it was pretty clear that it is on the license holders person, when they are in the vehicle, if they leave, then it is to be locked in the vehicle out of sight.

He also said that a overzealous prosecuted would most likely charge you and then your fate is up to a judge to interpret, which he said would be very foolish especially in this climate. He made another good point as well, open carry is legal, go try it in Seattle and see how well that works out.

There is a (I), (ii), and (iii) exception and they are separated by an OR. So you are fine as long as you remain in the vehicle with the pistol.

(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or (iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle.

Perfectly legal, but it is up to the officer on how they interpret the law at that moment in time. You may get a ticket for it, but it would be pretty easy to fight in court.

Which is what my friends lawyer was fearful of, a judges interpretation. My neighbor who is a lawyer as well has said it's a good question for a firearm lawyer as leaving it up to a da or judge is not a good idea. Might just pay Keith at Northwest Gun Law for a written opinion on it.

Legal. Had the same question and I found this and saved it years ago.

Judges and lawyers are fluent in "legalese" whereas other people are not. I would not be as concerned about a judge or lawyer as I would a regular person.

Had the same argument with a cop before, you have to see the lines separate you can't read them all in the same line. A friend got crap about it before he has that letter saved for future reference.

Yes they are fluent, yet how many times have we seen them interpret something entirely different. We saw what Ferguson did with his interpretation, I need to get one of those letters for myself. To many cops think they know the law, and even more DA's who hate guns.

And the question I asked in the other thread, for which I never got an answer, is- doesn't it seem like (iii) basically negates the requirement for the owner to be present in the vehicle? Just as long as the pistol is concealed from view?

It would seem to me that the most annoying part of this law is the stipulation that it's legal to carry a loaded pistol in a car only if the owner is present. Now, provided that a pistol isn't in plain view it is legal to carry a pistol and NOT be present according to (iii). It's my humble opinion that the law is worded this way to encourage people to keep firearms out of view in order to reduce vehicle break ins and firearm thefts.

Reason I ask is I have an AR pistol that doesn't exactly fit IWB. It sometimes travels with me (along with my carry piece) if I have the unfortunate task of visiting one of the armpit areas of the state.



eta: I guess I should've just kept reading That letter will go in my vehicle as well, thanks for posting.

dbl

Which makes me ask, is it meant singular or plural? It states pistol, not pistols. Anyone care to clarify that?

It's specifically allowed for a CPL holder in the RCW.

I have a question about the iii part.  

"(iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle."


Now, does that mean the pistol needs to be locked in a separate container, or inside a locked vehicle?

Lock your doors when you leave.

Thanks for the image, really is a case closed on that alone.

It's not up to the officer's interpretation. It's up to case law and how courts have interpreted law.

I am fairly certain that most Officers have a fairly clear understanding of this law.  I know for a fact that it's well understood by everyone I used to work with and it was not an uncommon scenario to run across CPL holders who stated they had a pistol in the glove box or under the seat.  Not a big deal.

Yes, some LE folks do not have an encyclopedic knowledge of the ins-and-outs of every single law.  They usually know the common ones they deal with pretty well and look up others as necessary.  Troopers know traffic laws really well.  They know DUIs and dope really well.  However, they may not know firearms stuff really well as it's usually not something they would deal with until after they make an arrest for something else (and thus have plenty of time to look up the relevant RCW).  If the trooper talked-it-out with your buddy and decided not to cite or arrest him, then I would say the Trooper decided that your buddy is right.  Troopers everywhere are notorious in the LE community for being sticklers for the law and not giving a lot of breaks.

True, but you could have a hell of a ride proving that you are correct.

I got pulled over by wsp once with a loaded pistol in my console(he asked about weapons, I told him) he basically said something along the lines of "don't touch yours, I won't touch mine", then he gave me a ticket for speeding and we went our own ways.