| Author | Post |
|---|
M1Gunr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Mar 4th, 2009 04:37 am |
|
just_a_car wrote: You want seeing is believing? Come to a lunch/dinner meetup.
Why the hell should we have to go out and make a video to ease your fears?
This Sunday at Mile Post 135 northbound on I-5 will be a group of us picking up trash while armed. And just for you I will wear 2 weapons exposed. One on my hip and one in a shoulder holster. There will be a big orange sign to mark the area.
Attached Image (viewed 401 times):
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 3075 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 4th, 2009 04:53 am |
|
amzbrady wrote: The point I'm trying to make is... I feel everystate should be Open Carry like virginia, and new hampshire. There a few people on this sire saying WA is open carry but I can not find anything, as far as Pictures, and video, showing people in the public with visable pistols in holsters at thier side. Even your video at CC Courthouse, didnt show your sidearm, "unless I missed it". I would love to jump on the bandwagon and support Open carry in WA. I would rather Open Carry than have to have a cpl. I just dont wanna be the minority. If you know of any other video out there showing some convincing footage, please forward the links. I am firm on seeing is believing. Dude you are either a troll, or simply don't get the plain facts in front of your eyes. I have at least half a dozen different documents from various police agencies which state in very plain english that Washignton State is an open carry state. If you cannot come to grips with reality, or work up the nerve to face the facts in front of your face then go somewhere else. Read some of the OC bulletins from local police agencies. That should be a real solid clue as to what is going on.
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Mar 4th, 2009 08:03 pm |
|
It could be he was raised an anti and all his friends are anti, almost all media is anti, the misconceptions are very bountiful, or just overly fearful. Hopefully he sticks around reads more and is telling the truth about wanting to be open carry. If I lived closer to Ocean Shores I would ask him out for a cup of coffee to discuss why I carry, and open carry to show I am not just talking the talk.
If you are still interested Amzbrady in open carry I would suggest you word your concerns and questions in a less negative way and do more research, and attend a meet like the one in Seatac March 28th were there hopefully will be Law Enforcement there also. No need to open carry if you are not comfortable, but would be a good educational experience. If you ever are up north state Whatcom county area PM me I will meet you for coffee. I will be surfing this summer in Westport if you ever make it that way too.
|
cynicist
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | Yakima County |
| Posts: | 417 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 24th, 2009 06:19 am |
|
unbelievably casado or whatever his name is won while being a felon with drugs. how do you like that. I need to see a definite case involving a pistol in holster.
The thing that they get you on is "or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons." All they need is someone to feel threatened and call the police. Thats where they get ya.
That's not true.
From the State v. Casad ruling:
"It is not unlawful for a person to responsibly walk down the
street with a visible firearm, even if this action would shock some people."
There a few people on this sire saying WA is open carry but I can not find anything, as far as Pictures, and video, showing people in the public with visable pistols in holsters at thier side. Those have nothing to do with WA being an open carry state. If it's not illegal, it's legal. "Nulle crimen sine lege" is that old Latin term for it, ("there is no crime without a law") and it's continued to this day (USA PATRIOT ACT notwithstanding.)
Case law has show it to be legal, and there is no law against it. Therefore it's legal. A video would prove nothing, as a search of youtube will show you any kind of criminal activity you want.
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 3075 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 29th, 2009 06:06 pm |
|
Keep in mind Cassad is not a "published" ruling which means it cannot be cited in future cases as an example of case law. It is a good example of how the law is viewed and interpreted in this state though.
|
arentol
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 10th, 2009 10:53 pm |
|
It doesn't really matter what the state statutes say or how you chose to interpret them anyway because the state is constitutionally barred from impairing your right to bear arms in defense of yourself:
SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
So if the state chooses not to allow open carry then your right to bear arms in defense of yourself is definitely impaired and that would be a violation of the state constitution.
The basic error people make is in looking for the expression of a right amongst criminal statues. The purpose of criminal statutes is to define only three things: What is NOT legal (a crime), what the penalty is for each crime, and what exceptions there may be to each crime (like the many exceptions given to law enforcement officers).
So you don't go looking to RCW 9.41.270 to find out whether you can bear arms. You look at RCW 9.41.270 to find out what actions while bearing arms are illegal. The right to bear arms in and of itself is already given to you via the state constitution.
As a matter of fact, if you look closely you will realize RCW 9.41.270 in fact AFFIRMS the right to open carry. You see, if open carry was illegal then 9.41.270 would simply state:
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm.
By defining in detail what OTHER things must take place for carrying a weapon to be illegal there is an automatic implication of consent to carry as long as you do not meet those conditions that make it illegal.
The question then goes to the courts (via cases presented to them) to decide what qualifies as "a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons."
The tricky part that makes everyone so certain you can OC in WA is this... If OC alone is sufficient to warrant alarm or intimidate another in and of itself then there is no right to bear arms in defense of yourself without a CPL license. Having to pay money and be fingerprinted and background checked is DEFINITELY an impairment to your right to keep an bear arms in defense of yourself. So if RCW 9.41.270 is ever used to convict someone in a simple OC case the law will be overturned on appeal.
There is also the matter of the training bulletins and Attorney Generals opinons on OC. I am not going to go into why those make it legal, because they don't. Those are policy decisions to not try to use OC as probable cause, which is done for a good reason.
Allow me to explain WHY the Attorney General does not want ANYONE to EVER be arrested and prosecuted for OC....
As is clear from all the above TECHNICALLY OC is still in a little bit of a state of limbo because no real ruling has yet been made. The constitution pretty clearly makes it legal, but RCW 9.41.270 pushes that issue just a teeny bit. So what happens if an pistol OC'er is tried and convicted under RCW 9.41.270 ANYWHERE in the state of WA? He might just appeal (eventually) to the state supreme court, and then OC will NOT be in a state of limbo anymore, it will be clearly and expressly legal.
Right now the police and the attorney general prefer that this issue not be settled because it does occasionally give them some leeway to get probable cause to search real criminals. For instance, in State vs. Casad if the officer had been able to provide a statement from someone that Casad put down one of the rifles and aimed the other rifle at someone then that case would not have been overturned. Unfortunately they had a straight up OC situation and so Casad won on appeal. If the statue is challenged and loses on a true OC case then everyone ever convicted based on evidence gained from probable cause brought about by RCW 9.41.270 will appeal, and some (not most, but some) will win and be freed.
Keep in mind though it is not that simple.. It has to be the right kind of case to fark everything up. The problem is that if the police pick up every OC'er they see all willy-nilly for even just a couple months the perfect case to fark over the law WILL come up, and you can bet some lawyer looking to make a name for himself by overturning a state law WILL jump all over that case and fark over RCW 9.41.270.
So that is why OC is legal here.. First because it simply is because of the WA constitution, and second because the AG knows that the only law that could disallow it is unconstitutional if applied in that manner and he doesn't want to fark over that law which is still useful for other reasons.
Last edited on Fri Apr 10th, 2009 10:58 pm by arentol
|
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11th, 2009 12:42 am |
|
arentol wrote: [much worth reading; snipped none-the-less]
Welcome to the board. I appreciate the thought and reasoning with which you post.
|
amzbrady
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22nd, 2009 08:35 pm |
|
Last edited on Wed Apr 22nd, 2009 08:36 pm by amzbrady
|
amzbrady
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22nd, 2009 08:37 pm |
|
| I didnt see anything about Post offices. Ours has a sign that says no guns allowed. Is this a federal building, and if so shouldnt they provide a lock box to secure your weapon?
|
amzbrady
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 22nd, 2009 08:39 pm |
|
| I didnt see anything about Post offices. Ours has a sign that says no guns allowed. Is this a federal building, and if so shouldnt they provide a lock box to secure your weapon?
|
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
| Joined: | Wed Aug 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Olympia, WA |
| Posts: | 3075 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 23rd, 2009 04:41 am |
|
There is no FEDERAL obligation to secure guns in a federal building. The post office is weird. They ban guns with one statute, but in another exempt them for "lawful purposes."
|
FMCDH
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri May 22nd, 2009 03:42 am |
|
sv_libertarian wrote: There is no FEDERAL obligation to secure guns in a federal building. The post office is weird. They ban guns with one statute, but in another exempt them for "lawful purposes."
That's their way of saying that if a bad guy chased you onto Postal Service property and you were forced to use your pistol to defend yourself as a last resort, you would PROBABLY be ok.
I read the dichotomy to mean that you may not willingly carry or cause to be carried a firearm onto Postal Service property, it must be by immediate lawful necessity. 
|
amzbrady
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 10th, 2009 04:38 am |
|
Theoretical questions in related parts:
1) I am CC W/IWB holster with my jacket covering the butt of my sidearm. I stop at a Quicky Mart, I am hot so I take my jacket off and go inside to talk to the owner whom I know. Now the barrel of my gun is holstered in my waist band and the butt of the gun is exposed, is this OC or CC?
2) If concidered CC... A sheriff walks in and asks to see my CWP. Am I on private Property or Public Property? Do I have to produce my CWP?
3) If concidered OP... Do I have to produce ID if asked.
This didnt happen to me, but a guy I know who works at a fuel station was carrying concealed and his shirt came up and over the butt of his gun after reaching up for a pack of cigarettes from the overhead rack. A sheriff noticed the butt of the gun and asked him for his cwp telling him he is in public. Which made me question in the above manner. I told him the way I interperted the laws and from what I've read here. He is on Private Property so OC or CC doesnt matter with permit or not, and with the butt of the gun showing I interperate that as OC. I know some states, you do not legally have to produce ID unless you are under arrest. I thought I remembered hearing of a law here that said you could be arrested or detained if you did not have ID on your person in public. Just looking for some clarity...
|
FMCDH
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 10th, 2009 01:41 pm |
|
RCW 9.41.050Carrying firearms.
(1)(a) Except in the person's place of abode or fixed place of business, a person shall not carry a pistol concealed on his or her person without a license to carry a concealed pistol.
(b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so. Any violation of this subsection (1)(b) shall be a class 1 civil infraction under chapter 7.80 RCW and shall be punished accordingly pursuant to chapter 7.80 RCW and the infraction rules for courts of limited jurisdiction.
(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.
(b) A violation of this subsection is a misdemeanor.
(3)(a) A person at least eighteen years of age who is in possession of an unloaded pistol shall not leave the unloaded pistol in a vehicle unless the unloaded pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle.
(b) A violation of this subsection is a misdemeanor.
(4) Nothing in this section permits the possession of firearms illegal to possess under state or federal law.
|
kwiebe
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16th, 2009 09:11 pm |
|
Intro: I'm new to this site, long-time Tacoma resident, love the site!
I'm 48 and recently decided it would be good to join the NRA, learn the ropes, get some experience, etc. I have some light experience recreational shooting but that dates back many years, so I'm considering this a fresh start. I'm bringing my 17-yo son along with me for this endeavor, and my brother too. We're trying to do things right, i.e., classes, reading, practice, etc.
My CPL application is pending, should have it soon. Last night I was going over the stuff they handed out where I turned in my application, got to reading the laws and started wondering about OC in WA. I just always assumed OC was verboten here, but couldn't find any reference in the laws to carrying, other than CC. Came to the conclusion OC must be legal, so today came across this site and realized I was correct!
Again, great site and glad to be here. Hope to become a contributing member.
|
FMCDH
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17th, 2009 02:12 am |
|
kwiebe wrote: ...I just always assumed OC was verboten here, but couldn't find any reference in the laws to carrying, other than CC. Came to the conclusion OC must be legal, so today came across this site and realized I was correct!
Again, great site and glad to be here. Hope to become a contributing member.
Welcome to the board Kwiebe!
You are very correct. The purpose of the law outlines what we CANT do, not what we can do, so therefore, if something is not explicitly or implicitly illegal, it is legal.
|
Batousaii
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 29th, 2009 10:01 am |
|
kwiebe wrote: ... I just always assumed OC was verboten here, but couldn't find any reference in the laws to carrying, other than CC...
Yeah, me too. Uncle sam dropped me off here in WA after growing up in CA. We all know CA loves to crush our " "... so, admittedly a bit timid. I was elated at having my CC permit here in WA. and been carrying sparky for almost 10 years since. Recently had a guy come into our establishment with OC, so it got my curiosity up. That's when i found the site too - absolutely, 100% awesome. makes me feel American again.
 Bat
p.s. still working on the "" to OC .. i will get there.
|
bigd_74
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21st, 2009 06:18 am |
|
Another newbie here. Had my CPL since '99 & am going to start carrying OC too.
Hope to be a contributor to the forum as well. 
|
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21st, 2009 03:26 pm |
|
Welcome to the forum, and look forward to your contribution. Open carry has been my way of life, for several months and I don't leave home without it.
Out of curiosity I am wondering how you found this site? I am thinking all this news coverage of late is going to give this site a big bump in membership nationwide.
|
bigd_74
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21st, 2009 04:33 pm |
|
sudden valley gunner wrote: Welcome to the forum, and look forward to your contribution. Open carry has been my way of life, for several months and I don't leave home without it.
Out of curiosity I am wondering how you found this site? I am thinking all this news coverage of late is going to give this site a big bump in membership nationwide.
Thank-you for the welcome! I usually carry when I leave the house but it is usually CC. I found the site about 6 months ago talking with some friends on a motorcycle forum that I frequent. There was a discussion about CC and OC in WA & OR. Someone referenced this site and I bookmarked it.
Went shooting this last weekend with some friends of a friend & both of the guys I met for the first time were OC'ing. It reminded me of the site here so I thought I would officially sign up, contribute and be involved when I can. My dad & I are WAC members & frequent the gun show locally.
I would agree that with the current national issues, we will see more activity here.
Dave~
|
Current time is 11:41 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4 5   |
|
