[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6379258,"mediaKeyId","2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878","parentId",2136488,"title","Panel Debates Venue and Eligibility Changes in HB 1118 on Restoration of Firearm Rights","audioSeconds",1016,"startMs",5702000,"endMs",6718000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878&start=5702&end=6718","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878/thumbnail_5702000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6379258/Washington/Panel-Debates-Venue-and-Eligibility-Changes-in-HB-1118-on-Restoration-of-Firearm-Rights","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379258-ce6dc551ee39284cb8e4f3f6a85cb161/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578515&Signature=mDoQO~Q9kB1MXtcvv15G4DSa6XFoxgDe458dBThKWbKdbjlMvqm4b1Zu-IJ0ECXaHabLcs4EXBV~Np303PyNX2R7r00iwZ~gKXBxhuODBbXehAnN4eRPOHNA2DtFwCBUpZH9vQW-pWMbtbMhOmYA1qSVP1eQEEgAQGudA~32VEl19Vv9kL9GCGcnqspJ1cn8iQWE3FQVBvAZFPFecKbLuYiC59XzUrvDgbvvnNx1o2nEqGO9CMBrnGxwtqr4fxoC7b3NKMt~Oxzhczdx~3v2-GFJd-ZT-2v2TEhyAk8nHPbkyfOjLKuOin6l7BTDh2tINIqgpfzA6pxxxQ0AJjFYfw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Civil Rights & Judiciary","date","2025-01-21T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 1118 would change where a person may petition a superior court for restoration of firearm rights and would narrow some offenses that permanently bar a petition. Currently, a person seeking restoration must file in the county that entered the prohibition; HB 1118 would allow filing in any county that entered the prohibition, in the petitioner’s county of residence if the prohibiting conviction did not occur in Washington, or in Thurston County if the petitioner is not a Washington resident. The bill would also exclude certain class B nonviolent drug offenses from the list of offenses that prohibit a petition for restoration.

Sponsor Representative Tara Simmons described the bill as bipartisan and said it was intended to address technical and equity issues in the restoration process — particularly for people whose underlying convictions occurred out of state and who therefore lack a practical venue to petition in Washington. Several witnesses, including individuals who said they had regained rights or sought restoration, testified in support and urged easier access to restoration for rehabilitated individuals.

Opponents, including organizations that represent survivors of intimate-partner violence and narcotics investigators, urged caution. The Violence Law Center and others asked the committee to allow the Washington Supreme Court to issue its pending decision in State v. Aarons (oral argument scheduled) before the Legislature changes venue rules. Those witnesses emphasized that filing in the county that entered the prohibition gives local prosecutors and law enforcement jurisdictional context and contact information for survivors and urged the committee not to make changes that could reduce survivor protections.

Other witnesses supported the bill on fairness grounds, arguing that people who have paid their debt to society and been rehabilitated should be able to pursue restoration; prosecutors and defense stakeholders also urged clarifying full faith-and-credit recognition for out-of-state restorations. The committee heard testimony from prosecutors who said the bill could be improved by adding full-faith-and-credit language so an out-of-state restoration would be recognized in Washington without repeating court processes.

The hearing closed without a committee vote. Committee staff and several witnesses said they would follow up with technical suggestions and pointed to a pending Washington Supreme Court case that could affect venue law.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Civil Rights & Judiciary - 1/21/2025 10:30 AM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 1118 would broaden where petitioners may file a superior-court petition to restore firearm rights — allowing filing in the county that entered the prohibition, in a petitioner’s Washington county of residence when the underlying conviction was outside the state, or in Thurston County for nonresidents — and would remove certain class B nonviolent drug offenses from the list of disqualifying convictions.","taxTitle","Civil Rights & Judiciary, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20256,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6379267,"Panel Debates Limits on Bulk Firearm and Ammunition Sales in HB 1132",1711,2363000,4074000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878&start=2363&end=4074","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878/thumbnail_2363000.jpg","/articles/6379267/Washington/Panel-Debates-Limits-on-Bulk-Firearm-and-Ammunition-Sales-in-HB-1132","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379267-fd8180248c4855afe681729f6d214873/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578515&Signature=Ub-A5oi5ZjI4~wk19Gk2~IpfA8GStZ6VlhqmL8CAZZMBaRAz5YzM1cahIIQhpUt6LVDGft7gtvaTSXf8Y19BCRCz9DyonT~SnS41AD~~5wrghcPSRWolOZHkNFbQJo870ey~w3r2sdEOHIiyLQes9Er7iRb1oCigPiZFQtvcbYCOM8GrH0X09KX42vEHiyHB8dgVfQt-o~JZWZ8gS5cy6Rao-61KbPTkKwQkxA3PFBLPE82IN1WzXEJ9QTg~3EVyVNOCs4B1pXKyuoSjJqL0TdeQYzNZ1FckAcHcNQAMa5D0WU~DoH9FfR1cnjPNqmwoZ2F2BzyGundbb-j~6HIJkw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1132 would prohibit federally licensed firearm dealers from delivering more than one firearm to a single purchaser within any 30-day period and would cap ammunition deliveries to no more than 100 rounds of .50 caliber ammunition or no more than 1,000 rounds of other calibers to a purchaser within any 30-day period. The bill includes exceptions for law enforcement, correctional facilities, private security companies and other enumerated categories, and the proposed substitute conditions compliance on dealer licensure and authorizes license forfeiture for violations.

Sponsor Representative Farvar told the Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee the bill aims to reduce illegal trafficking and stockpiling that feed violent crime. Supporters at the Jan. 21 hearing pointed to the Las Vegas 2017 and other mass shootings as examples where large-scale stockpiling preceded an attack; witnesses cited research they said shows bulk purchases are more likely to be used in crimes and to have serial numbers removed.

Opposition testimony argued the measure would unduly burden competitive shooters, instructors and women’s training programs that need large quantities of ammunition for legitimate practice and education. Competitive shooters and club representatives said months of training or a single match can require several thousand rounds; instructors said restrictions would reduce training frequency and effectiveness. Industry representatives and the NRA warned of constitutional concerns and predicted litigation and business compliance costs, noting dealers already face substantial regulatory requirements.

Committee members asked questions about the study citations linking bulk purchases to crimes and about how the bill would be enforced and implemented at the dealer level. Some witnesses urged the legislature to focus enforcement on criminal networks rather than restricting lawful purchasers. The committee concluded the public hearing with testimony from both survivors and law-abiding firearms community members; no committee vote was taken on Jan. 21.","House Bill 1132 would prohibit dealers from delivering more than one firearm to a purchaser within 30 days and would cap ammunition deliveries at 100 rounds of .50-caliber or 1,000 rounds of other calibers per 30 days, with listed exceptions for law enforcement and similar entities.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6379271,"Committee Hears Bill Requiring Locked, Concealed Storage for Guns in Homes and Vehicles",2208,168000,2376000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878&start=168&end=2376","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878/thumbnail_168000.jpg","/articles/6379271/Washington/Committee-Hears-Bill-Requiring-Locked-Concealed-Storage-for-Guns-in-Homes-and-Vehicles","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379271-abaf87ff086ffcda284bf8795086d69b/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578515&Signature=TdjH1AfExNjT07DZ~FzHVgD72zaR50xcouf9vK~TyxWaUEaqCaplbdSGPZIoLco6MhdWfxS3SuGM0IxS8GVkxeNuGGhIVpALXcpvGryDMqO~Rcx~t925ClCfbcek8xHEnL-kQHEanujKn-LVVu2wWXID3uAQFKjZe42YDZuLdVXTCSmlnJgpbg5iOiXVYnoA2sNPEZGR-GRxL2bqI1yN5xcvJCPZzGdYhZqYMTKQ18lBh3p3Cbq6nE0MK4-PFM8mc64umDw0wtbICRVymuO9dWcn0z~Qh5Doy3e-DYePvhfEERbpQy-c0elnLr68EmlrAdt8ro6DmsR3mSqmqEgA-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1152 would require firearms left in vehicles to be stored unloaded in an opaque, locked container affixed within the vehicle, concealed from outside view, and for the vehicle to be locked; pistols must be in hard-sided containers while rifles and shotguns may be in hard- or soft-sided containers. The bill would also require firearms in residences to be securely stored whenever not being carried or readily controlled by the owner or other lawfully authorized user, and it prescribes civil and criminal penalties for violations.

The proposal, presented to the Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee on Jan. 21, 2025, would make unsecured storage a civil infraction subject to a $1,000 penalty and escalate criminal penalties when a prohibited person obtains the firearm: misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, or class C felony depending on resulting harm. The measure would also expand duties of the Washington Office of Firearm Safety and Violence Prevention to include public education on secure storage.

Supporters described the bill as a public-safety measure that builds on existing law. Representative Beth D'A'Leo, the bill's prime sponsor, told the committee the measure ‘‘builds on that shared value to address a pressing public safety issue, unsecured firearms,’’ and cited statewide data on stolen firearms. Testimony from survivors and prevention groups emphasized child safety and suicide prevention: Sandra Ramirez described the 2024 death of her 13-year-old son after a youth found a loaded gun in an unlocked safe, and public-health and pediatric clinicians cited statistics linking unsecured firearms to unintentional shootings and youth suicide.

Opponents warned the committee the bill could burden lawful self-defense, be difficult or costly to comply with, and improperly shift blame to victims of theft. Speakers including competitive shooters, the National Rifle Association and multiple individual witnesses argued that the storage requirements — especially as applied to vehicles, renters and people who live in vehicles — could leave some people vulnerable or impose inequitable costs. Several witnesses also questioned how the bill would affect incidents such as vehicle thefts or police pursuits.

Committee members asked for clarifications about several technical points in the bill. Representative Graham asked whether a firearm that is locked in a stolen vehicle still implicates the statute’s penalties; the prime sponsor deferred to staff and said she would follow up. Representatives also pressed the sponsor on the statutory exceptions listed in the bill (antique firearms, farm vehicles used on private farmland, persons living in vehicles, peace officers and other categories) and whether the bill should expand exemptions for guard or reserve military members.

The public hearing included a broad range of comment: survivors and safety advocates urged passage as a means to prevent theft, unintentional shootings and youth suicide; multiple witnesses representing gun-owner and shooting-sports organizations urged rejection, citing constitutional concerns, enforcement practicalities and possible impacts on self-defense and training. Staff and the sponsor said they would provide follow-up information to the committee on statutory interactions and clarify some exception language.

The hearing concluded without a committee vote; no formal action on the bill was recorded at the hearing. Committee staff referred members to the bill text and analysis for details and offered to supply clarifications requested by members.

House Bill 1152 now proceeds in the committee process for further consideration.","House Bill 1152 would require firearms left in vehicles to be stored unloaded in an opaque, locked container affixed within the vehicle, concealed from outside view, and for the vehicle to be locked; it also sets secure-storage standards for firearms in residences and establishes civil and criminal penalties for violations.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6379262,"Hearing on HB 1163: Proposal Would Require Permit to Purchase Firearms, Add Training and Background Checks",1607,4075000,5682000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878&start=4075&end=5682","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2136488-9b1e002f5f1ec19a22eb1ac4f91cd878/thumbnail_4075000.jpg","/articles/6379262/Washington/Hearing-on-HB-1163-Proposal-Would-Require-Permit-to-Purchase-Firearms-Add-Training-and-Background-Checks","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6379262-d47f7cf1633bf3ffe2a467f6dbdf2db8/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578515&Signature=lafCpRSs-sArqQ9MbXeTxu9I9BaLp8ypVAl9zJiUTVMssDtgD23ld7BnN7xSFitYnSChC6kV~iVJ0Q8XEUKLBr~OWrnbVszrX~la6gci5SF7tp2p4MSPfXceSOMqXvLgKfWK28tmk8tkMKGKXlxH2-iElBFcbiXurOqqabDYfZTMA6KErA97T9ViSemMdFLRg3j1liEzYQZ6JiesMgOrWD0hEo7KKFxnVlb2Xn0onB0tiFHFOUKrtb6u4RMMtLAOndMwOKQ5r9P9SiJugmcvOjQOzDAOQej5g0c2rlNAAIxrFY-thZUMvnrjXPrlf3~aoXScJKwdn7kE~cOmrchIow__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1163 would require a purchaser to have a valid permit to purchase firearms before a dealer may deliver a firearm. The permit would be issued by the Washington State Patrol following a fingerprint-based background check; permits would be valid for five years and renewable. The bill would move the firearm-safety training requirement from the point of sale to the permit-application process and require certified training programs to include live-fire exercises. The State Patrol would set permit fees to cover program costs, establish annual verification procedures, and be required to issue or deny permits within specified timeframes unless additional records are needed.

Supporters at the Jan. 21 hearing argued permit-to-purchase requirements are effective and cite research associating such laws with reductions in firearm homicides and suicides. Alex McCourt of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions told the committee that research shows states with permit-to-purchase systems experienced substantial reductions in firearm homicide and suicide and urged a favorable report. Testimony from students, faith groups, educational and child-safety advocates and municipal officials emphasized youth safety and suicide prevention and cited comparative state studies showing declines in firearm deaths after permit adoption.

Opponents — including firearms instructors, dealers and industry representatives — raised concerns about implementation burdens, delays in access to self-defense, training availability, and whether law enforcement and agencies can staff and execute the program. Several witnesses described practical effects on instructors and clubs that rely on bulk ammunition for training and competition and argued that applicant training requirements could strain existing course capacity. Industry witnesses and some opponents framed the requirement as an unconstitutional permit on a right and warned of enforcement costs and reduced access for law-abiding citizens.

Committee members asked about timelines, remedies for permit denials, and the bill’s delayed effective date; staff noted the bill contains a delayed effective date of Nov. 1, 2026, and that the bill’s judicial-review provisions do not specify remedies such as attorney’s fees. Witnesses representing hunter-education and conservation groups asked that existing certified hunter-safety courses be recognized to avoid redundant coursework for hunters. The hearing ended without a vote; no formal action was recorded at the Jan. 21 session.","House Bill 1163 would require a purchaser to have a Washington State Patrol-issued permit to purchase firearms, obtained after a fingerprint-based background check; permits would be valid for five years and training certification would be integrated into the permit process.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Panel Debates Venue and Eligibility Changes in HB 1118 on Restoration of Firearm Rights

Panel Debates Limits on Bulk Firearm and Ammunition Sales in HB 1132

Committee Hears Bill Requiring Locked, Concealed Storage for Guns in Homes and Vehicles

Hearing on HB 1163: Proposal Would Require Permit to Purchase Firearms, Add Training and Background Checks