HB 1139
In CommitteeHouse
Unlawful firearm possession
Promoting public safety and deterring unlawful firearm possession by increasing criminal penalties for unlawful possession of a firearm.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill increases penalties for unlawful firearm possession by classifying it as a violent offense, raising offender scores for repeat firearm offenses, and requiring mandatory jail bookings for such arrests. It also expands police arrest authority for firearm and domestic violence cases and adjusts sentencing guidelines to impose longer prison terms for violent and firearm-related crimes.
- Classifies unlawful possession of a firearm in the first or second degree as a violent offense under state law (RCW 9.94A.030).
- Increases offender scores for firearm possession convictions by adding two points for each prior firearm possession conviction (RCW 9.94A.525).
- Requires police officers to arrest and hold individuals without a warrant when they have probable cause to believe the person has unlawfully possessed a firearm (RCW 10.31.100).
- Amends sentencing guidelines to increase penalties for violent and serious violent offenses, including firearm-related crimes, by adjusting point calculations and offender score rules.
- Adds a new provision stating that prior convictions for unlawful firearm possession must be included in criminal history even if not previously counted in offender scores.
Who is affected
- Individuals convicted of unlawful firearm possession — People convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first or second degree will face higher offender scores, longer prison sentences, and mandatory jail booking upon arrest.
- Law enforcement officers — Law enforcement officers gain broader authority to arrest individuals without a warrant for unlawful firearm possession, domestic violence, and other offenses.
- Judicial and prosecutorial staff — Courts and prosecutors will apply stricter sentencing guidelines and higher offender scores for firearm-related and violent offenses.
- People with prior violent or firearm-related convictions — People with prior convictions for violent or firearm-related offenses may face significantly longer prison terms due to increased point calculations in sentencing grids.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for concerns
Potential Benefits (3)
Empowers law enforcement to remove firearms from individuals with probable cause of unlawful possession—potentially reducing access to firearms in high-risk situations (e.g., domestic violence, threats), though evidence on whether this reduces firearm-related homicides is mixed and context-dependent.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(e), RCW 10.31.100Increases offender scores for repeat firearm possession convictions, which may deter habitual firearm offenders from reoffending—though WSIPP analyses suggest that enhanced penalties have modest deterrent effects compared to swift, certain, but shorter sanctions.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 5, RCW 9.94A.525(22)Expands warrantless arrest authority for violations of protection orders—including extreme risk protection orders—which may enhance safety for victims of domestic violence and those at imminent risk of self-harm or interpersonal violence.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(b), RCW 10.31.100
Potential Concerns (5)
Mandates warrantless arrest for unlawful firearm possession based on probable cause, increasing the risk of over-policing and incarceration of low-level offenders—particularly young men and people of color—without evidence that this reduces serious violent crime. Research from the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) indicates that increased incarceration for non-violent firearm offenses yields diminishing returns on public safety and disproportionately impacts marginalized communities.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(e), RCW 10.31.100Expands police authority to arrest without a warrant for firearm possession, while simultaneously requiring prior firearm convictions to count double toward offender scores—effectively creating a de facto enhanced penalty regime that may violate due process principles by retroactively increasing punishment for prior conduct under a different legal standard.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(e), RCW 10.31.100; Sec. 5, RCW 9.94A.525(22)Increases state corrections costs by mandating longer sentences for firearm possession—especially for repeat offenders—without specifying funding sources. The fiscal impact statement acknowledges rising corrections costs, but the burden falls on state taxpayers and diverts resources from prevention, mental health, and community-based safety programs that WSIPP has shown to be more cost-effective.
FinancialPeopleRef: Sec. 5, RCW 9.94A.525(22); Sec. 7, RCW 9.94A.525(22)Classifies unlawful possession of a firearm in the first or second degree as a 'violent offense'—a legal reclassification that triggers harsher sentencing enhancements but lacks empirical support: WSIPP data shows firearm possession is rarely associated with direct physical violence, and reclassification may overstate risk, leading to unnecessary long-term incarceration.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3, RCW 9.94A.030(58)(a)(xv)Imposes a two-point enhancement for *every* prior firearm possession conviction, regardless of age, context, or whether the prior offense involved violence—this mechanical scoring may misrepresent actual risk and lead to disproportionately long sentences for individuals who pose little current threat, undermining rehabilitation incentives.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 5, RCW 9.94A.525(22)
Who Is Most Affected
Individuals with prior firearm convictions—especially those with non-violent histories—face significantly longer sentences and higher likelihood of incarceration due to the two-point enhancement and violent-offense reclassification. Young men and people of color are disproportionately affected due to existing racial disparities in policing and sentencing.
Law enforcement gains expanded arrest authority, particularly for firearm possession and domestic violence cases. However, this may strain community relations, especially in communities already skeptical of policing, and increase workload without corresponding resource increases.
Courts and prosecutors face heavier caseloads and longer sentencing hearings due to mandatory jail bookings and enhanced scoring. Prosecutors may use the threat of longer sentences to pressure plea deals, potentially reducing trial rates and undermining individualized justice.
People with prior convictions—especially those released into communities— face longer sentences if they are arrested again for firearm possession, even if the new offense is non-violent. This increases recidivism risk by limiting employment and housing opportunities post-release.