NRA Lawsuit against Washington State

Status
Not open for further replies.
Once we get the AFL, I am assuming we do not have to fingerprint & check records again for the CPL since they already did it and maybe there is no extra charge. Currently I believe the CPL is $55.

I wonder if after the August trial we could comeback and sue the state for making us pay for exercising a constitutional right, discriminatory practice based on nationality and for the $74.25 fee refund.
 
If they can't do the background check they still have to issue the license - that's in the order.

No unfortunatelly the same fingerprint check can't be used twice. You'd have to do it again
 
Sure they have to issue the license, but shouldn't they remit the payment for the FBI check since its the worst kept secret in at least this crowd, that the DOL can't get an FBI background check. :)

the current $74.25 fee covers
The nonrefundable fee, paid upon application, for the five-year license shall be fifty-five dollars plus additional charges imposed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation that are passed on to the applicant. The fee shall be distributed as follows:
Click to expand...

So the remittance of $19.25 should be coming my way (but I'm not going to hold my breath).
 
Well, the sheriff will not share the info. with DOL, it'll just give them the Ok to issue license or not. You will get FBI checked by your LE, so we can forget about the Federal background check refund.
 
user3214 is correct.. if you get a CPL you need to pay again.

I got my CPL after my green card, like I said before, If I had known about the trouble I would have got a new AFL the day after my Green card and I'd be good until citizenship day...

MD
 
Same as before with a few tweaks... of course you can feel free to write your own version.

RE: HB 1052-2009 as sponsored by Representative Moeller et. Al.

RCW9.41.170 requires that, in Washington State alone, all Legal Permanent Resident Aliens, also known as "Green Card Holders" or “LPRs”, are required to obtain an Alien Firearms License from the Washington State Department of Licensing if they choose to own, borrow, rent or even as so much as hold a firearm, without fear of prosecution for a Class C Felony, leading to probable deportation.

Please note that some legal opinion holds that;

Amendment XIV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution states the following:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That is, WA State is *in violation of the 14th amendment rights of all Legal Permanent Residents. A suit filed by the NRA et al is progressing through Federal Court; a preliminary injunction requiring DOL to recommence issuing AFLs – suspended for four years due to “…an administrative problem” (only?) – has been granted. That the injunction was granted means it passed four legal tests one of which is “…is the suit likely to succeed?”

Washington State HB 1052-2009 has been proposed to eliminate the current discriminatory situation against LPRs – NOTE; not illegal or non-immigrant Aliens, and thus will not be in direct contradiction of the Constitution nor existing Federal Laws.

As a Husband/Wife/Friend/Acquaintance of a Legal Permanent Resident who currently resides in Washington State, and is directly affected by the current RCWs, I trust that you will be in favor of ending such discrimination by supporting the immediate passing of HB1052-2009.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter and for your full support.

Yours sincerely;
Click to expand...
 
probably stating the obvious here, but since the checks are presumably largely the sane for AFL and CPL (I would bet that the AFL checks are actually deeper), wouldn't it make sense to have an additional check box on the AFL "Also process me for a CPL" so both authorizations could happen concurrently?

Heck, they could even charge both fees at once, and since they basically do the same checks, it would increase their revenue by using the same results and charging for them twice.

nah, that would be too easy, make way too much sense and save too much time avoiding redundant processes and needless paper pushing.
 
Government policy's are not rational. If it makes sense, then obviously the local government is going to refuse to do it.

I expect in this situation though they might consider joining the two forms, as an implicit "invitation" for AFL applicants to also apply for a CPL (if they did this I'd expect 90+% of AFL holders to also have a CPL). Considering the current situation here in WA I don't think that they'd like to do that, since they've entirely blocked our rights for 4-5 years, up to now on an administrative error, in a statute that is non-constitutional in the first place.

Anyway it's only another 4 weeks or so to wait. Then apply for the CPL.
 
I saved a guy at work from getting in deep you know what, today he just went in and did the application at the Sheriffs office... probably be a few more people here at work doing it too.

Now I'm the "ask that guy" at work.. LOL
 
On each background check there is box, what the check is for:
AFL
CPL
Crimital Investigation
...

So the purpose is to keep track of the checks and why there were done.
 
Cross posting from activism

Status update

Feb 10 Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on General Government Appropriations at 8:00 AM. (Subject to change)

General Government Appropriations Committee
Darneille, Jeannie (D) Chair [email protected]
Takko, Dean (D) Vice Chair [email protected]
McCune, Jim (R) [email protected]
Hinkle, Bill (R) [email protected]
Armstrong, Mike (R) [email protected]
Blake, Brian (D) [email protected]
Crouse, Larry (R) [email protected]
Dunshee, Hans (D) [email protected]
Hudgins, Zachary (D)
Kenney, Phyllis Gutierrez (D) [email protected]
Pedersen, Jamie (D) [email protected]
Sells, Mike (D) [email protected]
Short, Shelly (R) [email protected]
Van De Wege, Kevin (D) [email protected]
Williams, Brendan (D) [email protected]

Bulk Mail Address here
 
The bill was read only DFW had a beef with it.

On the other side of the spectrum, apparently I'm the very first LPR in WA State to have their AFL application completed and the license is being printed and sent off ASAP !!
 
Personally - I have to side with Washington on this one. Not to raise the alarms here, but I can think of 19 guys not all that long ago who came to this country legally, and at one point would have passed a simple background check. 19 guys who are PRECISELY the people we do NOT want to have guns on our soil.
Click to expand...

The 9/11 hijackers were not resident aliens with green cards. They were people who came on student visas. Some of them had overstayed their visas and were here illegally. People on visas are not eligible to purchase firearms in the United States.

So we're agreed that the State of Washington is wrong, right?

ECS
 
RE 9/11 NON-IMMIGRANT Aliens
It boils down to this:

People hell bent on doing harm will never go through the hoops we are willing to go through to stay legal, they will chose to do things that are illegal, that is their prerogative.

Their ability to get away with overstaying their welcome here in the USA has nothing to do with us legal permanent residents.

************************************************

user3214, yes I just phoned the DOL at about 16:15 today, and that is all it took to get the info.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
NRA files Second Amendment lawsuits in Illinois and California
Replies
5
Views
586
Cougfan2
C
J
  • Locked
9/4 Washington Post: NRA Finds A Welcome Audience at State Level
Replies
0
Views
324
JohnBT
J
M
  • Locked
NRA Amicus Brief
Replies
24
Views
930
ilbob
ilbob
J
  • Locked
DC wronged by Bush judge
Replies
4
Views
791
foghornl
F
M
  • Locked
Good News on Right to Carry in National Parks
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Fisherman_48768
F
Back
Top