• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

911 MWAG call == RAS/PC here in WA? A not-so-hypothetical case.

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
Just curious.... walking in front of the school on a sidewalk open carrying and a local LEO stops you and asks to see your CPL because you are in the Federal Gun Free School Zone. You tell him to pack sand, get a FED, I am not breaking any RCW. So he says, sure, no problem. 10 minutes later a Federal marshal or FBI agent shows up (entirely possible in Seattle). Now what?

Since you knew that you had to be licensed in order to carry the gun on the public sidewalk inside the 1000' Federal school zone, and since the local LEO demanded to see the required CPL, would you be in violation of RCW 9.41.050 for not displaying the CPL to a law enforcement officer upon demand?

Two separate questions.

I don't feel that I am in violation of RCW 9.41.050 due to the wording.
RCW 9.41.050(1)(b) said:
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

I am not required to have a CPL by this section (9.41), therefore I don't believe I am required to provide that to a state or local law officer on demand.


When a federal enforcement officer shows up I would provide them a CPL if requested as the federal law requires it as an exception.
 

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
Even though the Federal law does not require you to be in possession of your CPL? The exception in Federal law only specifies that you must be licensed by the state, but does not require possession of said license.

Since I am relying on an exception to a crime, I am burdened with showing that exception applies to me. While I may not be required to show and thus make them track it down themselves, I feel it better to relieve myself of the burden by showing it. While it may be a good test case, I am not financially able to support a case if one was to arise. If I had the money to run the test case, I would consider sterile carry down the walking trail as the way the law is written it does not seem to require the license be present. The only reason why I don't sterile carry at the park and trail now it just because the FGFZ and the possibilities of having a federal respond.
 

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
So, then, I must ask.... why not just show the CPL to the local cop in the first place and save yourself the wait for the FED to show up or the wait for the "reasonable amount of time" to expire? The Federal officer has no more authority to demand that you show him/her the CPL (because it is not required to be in your possession) than the local cop does....is your decision based solely upon the principal that the local cop cannot write you a citation for violating the Federal law, but the FED can; or is it based on not displaying to LEO a document that you are not required to be in possession of? I don't know, to me it just kind of seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face....I'm not going to show you (meaning the local LEO) my CPL because you can't write me a ticket for not showing it, but instead I am willing to stand here and wait for 20 minutes to see if you can summon another LEO who can write me a ticket if I don't show them my CPL.

Please don't get me wrong.... I always have and will continue to believe that a local LEO who would demand to see a CPL only because you were carrying a gun in the Federal GFSZ would only be doing so because they were being a power hungry a$$hat and nothing else.

A local LEO does not have the authority to enforce the law they are requesting the CPL for. While a Fed Leo is investigating the criminal violation of the FGFZ, which I am technically violating until an exception applies to me.

I know it may sound weird but giving my CPL to the local LEO has no bearing on my alleged violation of a Fed statue. He can choose to accept it, ignore it or call federal anyways. The only possible gain I get out of it would be less time waiting for a Fed LEO to show up. At the same time, I would be telling the local LEO its OK to stop, detain and ask law abiding citizens in FGFZ for CPLs while also waving my rights and conversing with someone that likely does not have my best interest in mind.

I am more concerned about giving the local LEO the precedence that its OK to contact someone regarding something they have no authority over than I am trying to spit in there face.
 

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
While I completely understand your reasons for not showing your CPL to the local officer, have you considered this....showing your CPL to the local LEO removes the entire basis of his authority to detain you until a Federal LEO arrives. Would you not be solidifying any claim you would have against the local LEO for unlawful detainment by showing your CPL to them and removing their RAS to detain you further?

It seems to me that a local LEO does have the legal authority to detain you inside a Federal GFSZ until it can be ascertained that you fall under an exception or until a FED arrives to issue the citation or until a reasonable time passes and a FED does not show up (and at least you and I seem to agree on that). By proving you fall under an exception you immediately remove that authority to detain you for any length of time.

This is just me, it would just seem like by not showing your CPL to the local officer and waiting for the FED to show, you are calling the Leo's bluff already KNOWING that he has 4 aces and a joker in his hand and while he may be detaining you for no other reason than to be a dick...he does have the legal authority to keep being a dick until you take that authority away by showing you are under the exception to the law.

Your right, I too believe he has the authority to detain me until a Fed LEO shows up, if he believes I am violating a Fed statue. However, he does not have the authority to determine if I meet exceptions to the federal statue. I think we are venturing into Good Cop vs Dick Cop senerio's here. Unfortunately, I have to assume the cop is a dick. If I show it to him and he lets me go (good cop), did he technically do the right thing? Did I actually remove the basis for his detention?

I don't think an unlawful detainment case would hold up if he held me after showing him my CPL (dick cop), just for the previous mentioned reason (he can't legally determine if I am except from a federal statue). He would likely stand his ground that he was waiting for a Fed LEO to come clear it up (dick cop).

I may mention to the local LEO that I am a CPL holder, if I am feeling jolly, but its not his job to determine if I am violating the federal statue. Like I said before, the only thing gained here is the possibility of a quicker release while setting a bad precedence for the local LEO.
 

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
Being inside the 1000' froma school zone, gave teh officer the PC to demand your CPL., you were performing an act that requires a CPL and allows the LEO to demand it, I would say that if you were walking on the side walk beside a school a school official might even be justified in asking for your CPL iaw the RCW

I would enjoy seeing a cite to what statue you think gives authority to a local or state LEO (even further a Joe Citizen) to demand a CPL for a federal statue.

I walk in front of a school all fairly often, no problems.
 
Last edited:

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
More than likely true (I am not a lawyer). So, yeah, I guess showing the local LEO the CPL could be the same as showing it during a traffic stop, like so many do, in the hopes of getting out of the ticket - in this case the detainment. Yet another facet to think about...

To be clear, most of this is of my opinion and how I came to the conclusion of how I personally would handle the scenario. I too am not a lawyer, I am not licensed to provide legal advise :).
 

EtdBob

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
48
Location
Planet Bob, ,
AGAIN! rinse and repeat-
1.Why am i being detained?
2.What is your RAS of a crime to make this a legal terry stop, what crime/statute are you investigating?
3.there is no actual crime here. am i free to leave?


Have your recorder running, know the law, never give into unlawful orders simply on color of authority.

Sounds good to me.
But ya know, I’ve lurked and read and tried the search feature, and I think I know how to handle an encounter with the cops, but can someone please tell me what the heck RAS stands for???
 

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
I would enjoy seeing a cite to what statue you think gives authority to a local or state LEO (even further a Joe Citizen) to demand a CPL for a federal statue.

I walk in front of a school all fairly often, no problems.

Retracted, I reread teh RCW and the Fed GFSZ and I was mis-remembering the language.
 

Trigger Dr

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
2,760
Location
Wa, ,
As a retired FED LEO, I can assure you that if a local LEO called a FED because you were in a GFZ, all the feds I know and worked with would tell the local to back off and leave the guy alone.
 

Knowledge

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
108
Location
Everett, WA
Stopped by local LEO for OCing in GFSZ

This is for Slapmonkay and NavyLCDR.

I took interest in your discussion on this.
From my understanding the GFSZ is outside the jurisdiction of local LE, correct? At least, that's what I got from your guy's discussion.
So, if you are OCing they have no authority to stop you. This is why...
At that point they are no different than a citizen calling local LE on you for OCing anywhere else. Even if they are concerned you are breaking federal law they lack RAS. They have to assume you are within the law. If they are so concerned, let them call the Feds. However, they have no authority to detain you. because, they lack RAS. Why do they lack RAS? Because, if they didn't, we could all be detained for OCing anywhere based solely on the premise that we were once found not guilty by reason of insanity or any other provision in RCW 9.41.040. Unless the LEO has knowledge of it, he/she can't do anything. The way I see it, the LEO cannot say "I'm not sure if you have your CPL, so, I'm gonna detain you till the Feds get here." They can't detain you because they think you might be in the wrong. That's not reasonable. Reasonable would be a LEO that knows you don't have a CPL. How he'd know that is beyond me. I'm not a lawyer either, I just wanted to join the discussion. So, that's my explanation...

Back to the original poster. I would not have showed them anything. If the Suspicion is Reasonable then they best be Articulating, or I'll be on my way.
 

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
This is for Slapmonkay and NavyLCDR.

I took interest in your discussion on this.
From my understanding the GFSZ is outside the jurisdiction of local LE, correct? At least, that's what I got from your guy's discussion.
So, if you are OCing they have no authority to stop you. This is why...
At that point they are no different than a citizen calling local LE on you for OCing anywhere else. Even if they are concerned you are breaking federal law they lack RAS. They have to assume you are within the law. If they are so concerned, let them call the Feds. However, they have no authority to detain you. because, they lack RAS. Why do they lack RAS? Because, if they didn't, we could all be detained for OCing anywhere based solely on the premise that we were once found not guilty by reason of insanity or any other provision in RCW 9.41.040. Unless the LEO has knowledge of it, he/she can't do anything. The way I see it, the LEO cannot say "I'm not sure if you have your CPL, so, I'm gonna detain you till the Feds get here." They can't detain you because they think you might be in the wrong. That's not reasonable. Reasonable would be a LEO that knows you don't have a CPL. How he'd know that is beyond me. I'm not a lawyer either, I just wanted to join the discussion. So, that's my explanation...

Back to the original poster. I would not have showed them anything. If the Suspicion is Reasonable then they best be Articulating, or I'll be on my way.
Not exactly. The local LEO still retain jurisdiction in the FGFZ. What they lack is jurisdiction/authority to enforce federal statues which the FGFZ is. Local LEO can still enforce state and local laws. I still believe the local LEO has authority to detain an individual that's suspected of a federal crime for a reasonable amount of time, however I have not verified with a statue cite for this.
 

Knowledge

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
108
Location
Everett, WA
Not exactly. The local LEO still retain jurisdiction in the FGFZ. What they lack is jurisdiction/authority to enforce federal statues which the FGFZ is. Local LEO can still enforce state and local laws. I still believe the local LEO has authority to detain an individual that's suspected of a federal crime for a reasonable amount of time, however I have not verified with a statue cite for this.

Aaa... I see. However, they can suspect all day long. Unless they know you don't have a CPL what is the RAS? I do a poor job at typing these things out. My argument is on the basis that they lack RAS. Unless they KNOW you don't have a CPL they are just wildly assuming stuff in order to detain you. Sure does bring up a good question...
 
Last edited:

Flopsweat

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
165
Location
Slightly right of center
I get it - absent any other corroborating evidence, how can your presence alone constitute reasonable suspicion? But it occurred to me - how do you know that the officer does not have any other evidence, be it valid or not? Not trying to be smart, but they don't have to tell you everything, and may have cause not to.

I'd probably very politely ask if he's ordering or requesting that I show ID/CPL/whatever. Let him figure out the RAS stuff - is he even required to tell you? If he's ordering, I'm complying, period. I can sort the rest out later and under less stress. But I'm new at this. Thoughts?
 

Jim675

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
1,023
Location
Bellevue, Washington, USA
So why would the GFSZ be different than driving?

[h=2]RCW 46.20.005
[/h][h=1]Driving without a license — Misdemeanor, when.[/h]

Except as expressly exempted by this chapter, it is a misdemeanor for a person to drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state without a valid driver's license...

LEO can't stop all drivers to check.
 

Knowledge

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
108
Location
Everett, WA
He can detain you long enough to determine that you fall under the EXCEPTION to RCW 9.41.280 of having a CPL and picking up or dropping off a student.[/QUOTE said:
First thing. If you're CCing then he can detain you, because you are required to show him your permit to do so. Which would also clear you while on school grounds, while picking up or dropping off a student.
However, if you're OCing he can still detain you, because you are once again required to show your permit. Not for OCing, but for being on school grounds which you are required to have a CPL for, giving the LEO authority to detain you, but only to verify that you have a CPL.
If you're not on school grounds and your CCing he can still detain, because you are required to show him your permit to do so.
But... If you're not on school grounds and your OCing he cannot detain you for being within 1000'. Because you are no longer under his jurisdictional limits. You are not obligated by the RCW to show your CPL, because there isn't a statue that requires you to show it while OCing next to a school.
For instance, I don't have a CPL (yet) However, I OC (unloaded) in my car. If i get pulled over and he asked to see my CPL, All I have to say is "It's unloaded, I'm not required to show you my CPL." Even if I had a CPL, and for some dumb reason still unloaded while driving, I would NOT be obligated to show it to him. Because technically I'm not using it. Sort of like being asked for a drivers license when you're walking.
My conclusion is, if your OCing down the street and a school is next to you and a local LEO pulls up and asks for your CPL, I'd ask "Am I obligated to?" if he says "Yes." I'd ask "Under what authority?" What statute gives him that authority? If I did this now (without a CPL) all he could do is get me in trouble with the FEDs. If you are performing a legal action (OCing next to a school) none of that requires a CPL, on the State level. It would not be a legal detainment.
 

Knowledge

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
108
Location
Everett, WA
So why would the GFSZ be different than driving?

[h=2]RCW 46.20.005
[/h][h=1]Driving without a license — Misdemeanor, when.[/h]

Except as expressly exempted by this chapter, it is a misdemeanor for a person to drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state without a valid driver's license...

LEO can't stop all drivers to check.

They also can't stop you just because you are driving while assuming you do NOT have a valid DL. A code must be broken first.
Good example!
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Here's some interesting case law on the ability of a State or Local police officer to arrest for violation of a Federal Law.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/2nd/001188.html

It's not an absolute as to whether a Local officer can or can't arrest. It will all boil down to whether the violation has a similar provision in State law or absent that, an agreement between Federal Authorities and State/Local on enforcement.

Some states have provisions in law that state an officer can arrest for "any felony, Local, State, or Federal." Some don't In the end, if one is arrested it's all going to be up to some judge, somewhere, as to whether the officer can or can't.
 

Flopsweat

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
165
Location
Slightly right of center
Once again, it is very easy, practice in front of the mirror if you have to:

Officer, am I being detained?

It's just that easy. If the answer is no, either walk away or ask to be left alone. If the answer is yes, state that you do not consent to any searches and you do not consent to any of your personal property being seized, but you will not physically resist.

Then, let the officer prove his RAS to the judge if it goes to court. All you have to prove to win your case in court is that you were unlawfully detained. Everything after that is just icing on the cake. Asking, "Am I being detained" settles the first question that will come up in court: were you detained, or was the encounter voluntary. Never rely upon the totality of the circumstances to determine if you were detained or not, always ask the question, preferrably on a recording or in front of witnesses.

OK.
 
Top