Originally Posted By PolarBear416:https://www.atg.wa.gov/ConcealedWeapons/FAQ.aspx#35 Do RCW 9.41.370 and 9.41.375 prohibit the transfers of large capacity magazines?
RCW 9.41.370 does not prohibit transfers, which are defined as the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans. However, you may need to comply with the background check requirements for private transfers of firearms under RCW 9.41.113.
Facilitating the transfer of a large capacity magazine online is prohibited under RCW 9.41.375.
"Transfer" does not include the delivery of a firearm owned or leased by an entity licensed or qualified to do business in the State of Washington to, or return of such a firearm by, any of that entity's employees or agents, defined to include volunteers participating in an honor guard, for lawful purposes in the ordinary course of business.
View Quote
Am I reading that right? So long as it's a bona fide gift, with nothing received in return, and not facilitated online, it's perfectly legal?
View Quote
Considering the AG is a f**ktard...
Magazines aren't firearms, so their FAQ is incorrect. Mags are critical for many firearms to operate, but they themselves are not firearms.
9.41.010 spells out what "distribute" means, so no, you can't gift one to a friend. The "Distributor" would be you, since the state doesn't identify it, let alone define it as a commercial operation.
(11) "Distribute" means to
give out, provide, make available, or deliver a firearm or
large capacity magazine to any person in this state, with or without consideration, whether the distributor is in-state or out-of-state. "Distribute" includes, but is not limited to, filling orders placed in this state, online or otherwise.
However, you can probably get away with going to ID or OR or someplace else and gifting the mag, as the law states "any person in this state." The law does not specify that person has to be a resident of WA.
I did notice there's a serious problem with the exemptions of the WA "large capacity magazine" definition: "(b) A 22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device;" and it still hasn't been fixed in new legislation.
The whole specific definition (emphasis mine):
(25) "Large capacity magazine" means an ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition, or any conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which such a device can be assembled if those parts are in possession of or under the control of the same person,
but shall not be construed to include any of the following:
(a) An ammunition feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds of ammunition;
(b) A 22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device; or
(c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.
Therefore, someone needs to come out with a mag - or start calling it - 22 Caliber Tube. There isn't a 22 caliber firearm or cannon (it's 558.8mm if you want to check), so it's an exemption for something that doesn't exist.
Until it does.
Too bad Magpul won't do anything.