Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Interesting Info from DNR concerning OC, and CC.

  1. #1
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990

    Interesting Info from DNR concerning OC, and CC.

    While out in Capitol Forest I was talking with a DNR guy, and he showed me a very recently published "Bail schedule". Which if I read it correctly states that any person (no ages given) that is not prohibited may not only OC, but CC also when going to/from, or taking part in outdoor activities with out a permit. I don't know how to post the actual PDF file on here, but here is the body of text from his e-mail:

    "Hey Xxxxx,

    Attached is a scanned electronic copy of pages 10-11 of the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Law Enforcement Services 2013 Bail Schedule. It covers Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms under RCW 9.41.060, stating "Persons may carry concealed pistols, including within a motor vehicle, without a permit if they are engaged in, or going to or from lawful recreational activities". Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area.

    Hope all is well and be safe out there,
    Brian, DNR"

    My take on it, it says my 16 year old son can OC/CC. After all at 14 you can go hunting alone at 14.
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  2. #2
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by golddigger14s View Post
    While out in Capitol Forest I was talking with a DNR guy, and he showed me a very recently published "Bail schedule". Which if I read it correctly states that any person (no ages given) that is not prohibited may not only OC, but CC also when going to/from, or taking part in outdoor activities with out a permit. I don't know how to post the actual PDF file on here, but here is the body of text from his e-mail:

    "Hey Xxxxx,

    Attached is a scanned electronic copy of pages 10-11 of the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Law Enforcement Services 2013 Bail Schedule. It covers Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms under RCW 9.41.060, stating "Persons may carry concealed pistols, including within a motor vehicle, without a permit if they are engaged in, or going to or from lawful recreational activities". Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area.

    Hope all is well and be safe out there,
    Brian, DNR"

    My take on it, it says my 16 year old son can OC/CC. After all at 14 you can go hunting alone at 14.
    I don't believe so. because RCW 9.41.060 is only a list of exemptions to RCW 9.41.050 (and by wording of RCW 9.41.240, also exempt an adult under 21 from the restriction in 9.41.240)

    Children are not allowed to possess firearms (RCW 9.41.040(2)(a)(iii) ) unless an exemption under RCW 9.41.042 exists.

    now depending upon what your son is doing, it appears he may be able to do a few things with a pistol by himself....

    RCW 9.41.042
    Children — Permissible firearm possession.

    RCW 9.41.040(2)(a)(iii) shall not apply to any person under the age of eighteen years who is:

    (1) In attendance at a hunter's safety course or a firearms safety course;

    (2) Engaging in practice in the use of a firearm or target shooting at an established range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located or any other area where the discharge of a firearm is not prohibited;

    (3) Engaging in an organized competition involving the use of a firearm, or participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized group that uses firearms as a part of the performance;

    (4) Hunting or trapping under a valid license issued to the person under Title 77 RCW;

    (5) In an area where the discharge of a firearm is permitted, is not trespassing, and the person either: (a) Is at least fourteen years of age, has been issued a hunter safety certificate, and is using a lawful firearm other than a pistol; or (b) is under the supervision of a parent, guardian, or other adult approved for the purpose by the parent or guardian;

    (6) Traveling with any unloaded firearm in the person's possession to or from any activity described in subsection (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of this section;

    (7) On real property under the control of his or her parent, other relative, or legal guardian and who has the permission of the parent or legal guardian to possess a firearm;

    (8) At his or her residence and who, with the permission of his or her parent or legal guardian, possesses a firearm for the purpose of exercising the rights specified in RCW 9A.16.020(3); or

    (9) Is a member of the armed forces of the United States, national guard, or organized reserves, when on duty.
    Keep in mind that saying "officer xyc of the DNR enforcement said it's ok" very rarely works as a defense.... even a publication of DNR is not a defense if it doesn't accurately reflect the law. tell the kid to pack an SKS, it'll make his shoulders stronger, he's in the prime of life....
    I carried a Mosin-Nagan with a 40 round cartridge box while hiking until I turned 18 and was able to carry my newly gifted revolver....

    But hey maybe Rap or Lammo should opine in, because I personally don't think the law allows him to do that. But I've been wrong before...
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 08-31-2013 at 09:34 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  3. #3
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    I don't believe so. because RCW 9.41.060 is only a list of exemptions to RCW 9.41.050 (and by wording of RCW 9.41.240, also exempt an adult under 21 from the restriction in 9.41.240)

    Children are not allowed to possess firearms (RCW 9.41.040(2)(a)(iii) ) unless an exemption under RCW 9.41.042 exists.

    now depending upon what your son is doing, it appears he may be able to do a few things with a pistol by himself....



    Keep in mind that saying "officer xyc of the DNR enforcement said it's ok" very rarely works as a defense.... even a publication of DNR is not a defense if it doesn't accurately reflect the law. tell the kid to pack an SKS, it'll make his shoulders stronger, he's in the prime of life....
    I carried a Mosin-Nagan with a 40 round cartridge box while hiking until I turned 18 and was able to carry my newly gifted revolver....

    But hey maybe Rap or Lammo should opine in, because I personally don't think the law allows him to do that. But I've been wrong before...

    The DNR guy is correct, and you are wrong ENM. The verbage which shows that is in the very first statement in RCW 9.41.060(8)... it reads "any person" it has NO restrictions as to age or anything else. The only restriction would not be in violation of .060. but some other law..as in a federally prohibited person. May I cut and paste the pertinent parts of .060


    RCW 9.41.060

    Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms.


    The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:

    (8) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity


    As for RCW 9.41.042 did you see:

    (5) In an area where the discharge of a firearm is permitted, is not trespassing, and the person either: (a) Is at least fourteen years of age, has been issued a hunter safety certificate, and is using a lawful firearm other than a pistol; or (b) is under the supervision of a parent, guardian, or other adult approved for the purpose by the parent or guardian
    Last edited by hermannr; 09-01-2013 at 02:59 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    The Feds aren't going to swarm down and prosecute a 16 year old for carrying a .357 in the woods.... US Attorneys want drugs to go with their gun violations....

    But the RCW 9.41.040 clearly makes it criminal possession (class C felony) for a minor to have a firearm... and 9.41.060 says

    The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:
    SNIPPED
    (8) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as....snipped
    before you chance having your kid cited or taken to juvenile hall until you can come pick him up (oh by the way, 9.41.098 allows the LE agency that cites him to take his (your) firearm and not give it back) you should probably have an attorney review that. the language of .060 says it's exempting "any person" from .050 and not .040.

    you willing to risk a kids criminal record on that? I sure wouldn't be....
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 09-01-2013 at 04:39 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  5. #5
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    The Feds aren't going to swarm down and prosecute a 16 year old for carrying a .357 in the woods.... US Attorneys want drugs to go with their gun violations....

    But the RCW 9.41.040 clearly makes it criminal possession (class C felony) for a minor to have a firearm... and 9.41.060 says



    before you chance having your kid cited or taken to juvenile hall until you can come pick him up (oh by the way, 9.41.098 allows the LE agency that cites him to take his (your) firearm and not give it back) you should probably have an attorney review that. the language of .060 says it's exempting "any person" from .050 and not .040.

    you willing to risk a kids criminal record on that? I sure wouldn't be....
    You didn't read RCW 9.41.42(5) did you?

  6. #6
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by hermannr View Post
    You didn't read RCW 9.41.42(5) did you?
    It says carrying a firearm other then a pistol or being under the supervision of the parent or other suitable adult.

    Of course if golddigger is supervising his son directly then it is ok for him to OC, but that has nothing to do with the section of law that he quoted in the OP

    when not under supervision his 16 year old seems unable to legally carry a pistol alone at risk of felony charges
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    It says carrying a firearm other then a pistol or being under the supervision of the parent or other suitable adult.

    Of course if golddigger is supervising his son directly then it is ok for him to OC, but that has nothing to do with the section of law that he quoted in the OP

    when not under supervision his 16 year old seems unable to legally carry a pistol alone at risk of felony charges
    (snip)

    These kind of sections are also perfect examples of the principle that it sometimes is beneficial to talk to the police while in the field and being questioned.

    Assume a case where you are found to be in possession of a concealed pistol and you are not in your abode or fixed place of business.

    The officer decided to custodially arrest you and seize your firearm. He is in the process of putting you in handcuffs


    He has PC, having found you in possession of a concealed pistol (loaded and on your hip whether concealed under clothes or not is considered a concealed weapon in WA state, if carried IN A VEHICLE

    ***BUT*** you are returning home from target shooting at Range X, same range being a mile from where you have been pulled over. You have your targets you just shot (bitchen pattern) which are signed and dated (today) in the trunk, too. You also have your headphones in there, your shooting glasses and a receipt from some ammo you bought at the range, which is of course time/date stamped establishing your innocence. You also have your membership card showing you are enrolled as a member, in that trunk. Furthermore, the owner was working just an hour ago when you bought the ammo, and is reachable by phone and could confirm you had just been shooting at the range and had left just before the traffic stop.

    do you
    1) explain that you don't need a permit since you are returning from a range where you had been target shooting, and you have equipment in the trunk to prove that, in addition to having the phone number of the range, so the officer can call the range and confirm you were shooting there and you just left

    2) remain silent

    If you choose 2, you will be transported to jail, and spend a night there before you are released ROR the next day at first appearance

    If you choose 1, you will not be arrested and the officer will send you on your merry way

    If you choose 2, you will likely be able to prove you were at the range (witness testimony at a minimum), but the defense won't be as strong as having the officer see the stuff in your trunk a mile from the range, and having the witness alibi you at the scene whereas at a later date he could have been coached to lie about it (not likely, but possible). and you will still have suffered being arrested and booked (for valid pc since you didn't pipe up he had no way of knowing you were in compliance with the subsection about target shooting, range membership, etc

    I know what *I* would do. Any person who wouldn't do (1) is insane

    I;'ve had literally hundreds of times in street contacts where PC or developing PC was vitiated because the suspect talked and gave an alibi, showed me excupatory evidence, etc. Those cases NEVER get to a docket, so the cases you SEE are almost always examples where talking hurt the defendant. In the cases where it helped, it so happened in most cases that he never got arrested in the first place, let alone charged.

    I once caught a suspected burglar who neighbors had seen crawl through the back 2nd story window of a house. I couldn't get in contact with the homeowner and he had a different last name than the homeowners (as verfieid via IMAP).

    He actually was a cousin, who was staying at the house for the week and he was able to direct us to the guest room where items establishing his having moved in a couple of days ago was evident. So, he got unarrested

    If he hadn't spoken up, we would have to arrest him on PC for burglary and could hold him 72 hrs before having to release him (since w/o a victim statement yet, the PC would not be strong enough to CHARGE, but would be strong enough to arrest)

    *MOST* officers don't want to make a bad arrest and/or are perfectly willing to check out stuff like this, especially when it requires such minimal effort as unlocking a trunk or making a phone call.

    Fwiw, I was held at gunpoint once as an armed robbery suspect (with ample RAS) and you are damn skippy I talked to them during the stop and established my innocence/alibi.

    There are MANY situations where remaining silent is the most prudent course, ESPECIALLY if you are guilty. But there are plenty where it's in your favor to speak up.
    Last edited by PALO; 09-02-2013 at 03:29 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member jt59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central South Sound
    Posts
    1,025

    Another exception??

    Quote Originally Posted by golddigger14s View Post
    While out in Capitol Forest I was talking with a DNR guy, and he showed me a very recently published "Bail schedule". Which if I read it correctly states that any person (no ages given) that is not prohibited may not only OC, but CC also when going to/from, or taking part in outdoor activities with out a permit. I don't know how to post the actual PDF file on here, but here is the body of text from his e-mail:

    "Hey Xxxxx,

    Attached is a scanned electronic copy of pages 10-11 of the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Law Enforcement Services 2013 Bail Schedule. It covers Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms under RCW 9.41.060, stating "Persons may carry concealed pistols, including within a motor vehicle, without a permit if they are engaged in, or going to or from lawful recreational activities". Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area.

    Hope all is well and be safe out there,
    Brian, DNR"

    My take on it, it says my 16 year old son can OC/CC. After all at 14 you can go hunting alone at 14.

    http://wdfw.wa.gov/help/questions/18...arm+seasons%3F

    Can persons younger than 21 legally hunt with a handgun during modern firearm seasons, and legally possess a handgun during archery or muzzleloading firearm seasons?

    •Yes. If you are under the age of 21 and you want to use a handgun to hunt or for personal protection while hunting, you must possess a legal hunting license, be hunting during legal seasons in open areas, and not be trespassing (RCW 9.41.060 and 9.41.240).

    I'd also be interested to hear Palo's take on "trespass" as it relates to the applied/implied DNR application here... When posted "no hunting", "hunting by permission only" and "no trespassing"....It seems like it may be a bit different from what you see in town and letters on file and police acting as agents....

    Comments?
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat....Teddy Roosevelt

  9. #9
    Regular Member jt59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central South Sound
    Posts
    1,025

    Carry for personal protection during archery

    Here is another piece that has been clarified...



    Can I carry a modern handgun while archery or muzzleloader hunting?

    Yes. A modern handgun can be carried while archery or muzzleloader hunting, but only for personal protection. Modern handguns cannot be used to hunt big game or to dispatch wounded big game during the big game hunting season for archery or muzzleloaders


    http://wdfw.wa.gov/help/questions/10...der+hunting%3F
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat....Teddy Roosevelt

  10. #10
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    (snip)

    These kind of sections are also perfect examples of the principle that it sometimes is beneficial to talk to the police while in the field and being questioned.

    Assume a case where you are found to be in possession of a concealed pistol and you are not in your abode or fixed place of business.

    The officer decided to custodially arrest you and seize your firearm. He is in the process of putting you in handcuffs


    He has PC, having found you in possession of a concealed pistol (loaded and on your hip whether concealed under clothes or not is considered a concealed weapon in WA state, if carried IN A VEHICLE

    ***BUT*** you are returning home from target shooting at Range X, same range being a mile from where you have been pulled over. You have your targets you just shot (bitchen pattern) which are signed and dated (today) in the trunk, too. You also have your headphones in there, your shooting glasses and a receipt from some ammo you bought at the range, which is of course time/date stamped establishing your innocence. You also have your membership card showing you are enrolled as a member, in that trunk. Furthermore, the owner was working just an hour ago when you bought the ammo, and is reachable by phone and could confirm you had just been shooting at the range and had left just before the traffic stop.

    do you
    1) explain that you don't need a permit since you are returning from a range where you had been target shooting, and you have equipment in the trunk to prove that, in addition to having the phone number of the range, so the officer can call the range and confirm you were shooting there and you just left

    2) remain silent

    If you choose 2, you will be transported to jail, and spend a night there before you are released ROR the next day at first appearance

    If you choose 1, you will not be arrested and the officer will send you on your merry way

    If you choose 2, you will likely be able to prove you were at the range (witness testimony at a minimum), but the defense won't be as strong as having the officer see the stuff in your trunk a mile from the range, and having the witness alibi you at the scene whereas at a later date he could have been coached to lie about it (not likely, but possible). and you will still have suffered being arrested and booked (for valid pc since you didn't pipe up he had no way of knowing you were in compliance with the subsection about target shooting, range membership, etc

    I know what *I* would do. Any person who wouldn't do (1) is insane

    I;'ve had literally hundreds of times in street contacts where PC or developing PC was vitiated because the suspect talked and gave an alibi, showed me excupatory evidence, etc. Those cases NEVER get to a docket, so the cases you SEE are almost always examples where talking hurt the defendant. In the cases where it helped, it so happened in most cases that he never got arrested in the first place, let alone charged.

    I once caught a suspected burglar who neighbors had seen crawl through the back 2nd story window of a house. I couldn't get in contact with the homeowner and he had a different last name than the homeowners (as verfieid via IMAP).

    He actually was a cousin, who was staying at the house for the week and he was able to direct us to the guest room where items establishing his having moved in a couple of days ago was evident. So, he got unarrested

    If he hadn't spoken up, we would have to arrest him on PC for burglary and could hold him 72 hrs before having to release him (since w/o a victim statement yet, the PC would not be strong enough to CHARGE, but would be strong enough to arrest)

    *MOST* officers don't want to make a bad arrest and/or are perfectly willing to check out stuff like this, especially when it requires such minimal effort as unlocking a trunk or making a phone call.

    Fwiw, I was held at gunpoint once as an armed robbery suspect (with ample RAS) and you are damn skippy I talked to them during the stop and established my innocence/alibi.

    There are MANY situations where remaining silent is the most prudent course, ESPECIALLY if you are guilty. But there are plenty where it's in your favor to speak up.
    For the record, from 1970 to 1992 I OC'd unlicensed. I carried a 6" Colt revolver in a hunting holster (the only pistol I owned at the time) and it is impossible to CC a pistol that large. In all of those years I spoke to LE one time. Chelan Co Sheriff's deputy had a 911 call that there was a man with a gun in the Manson grocery store. (This was about 30 years ago or so.) I was loading the camper with supplies when the Sheriff's deputy showed up. No winky blinky lights, no siren...he just drove into the parking lot and pulled up next to me and got out of his Sheriff's department truck. He walked over to me as I was getting into my truck and said one word "Hunting?" When I answered "yep", he muttered to himself about finding nothing illegal here, and then about finding the 911 caller to tell her such is perfectly legal. (this was when the Wapato Point timeshare Condos were just getting started)...no search, no request for ID or CPL, only that one word..."Hunting?" IMHO: This was handled exactly as it should be done. I did not have a CPL at the time, but then I did not need one for two reasons...first, I was not concealing my carry, and two, whether my carry was loaded or not, was irrelevant.

    I would be very surprised that an officer would be so ready as to cuff a person as you describe PALO, but I agree with you..staying silent does not help in these type situations.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327
    I'd also be interested to hear Palo's take on "trespass" as it relates to the applied/implied DNR application here... When posted "no hunting", "hunting by permission only" and "no trespassing"....It seems like it may be a bit different from what you see in town and letters on file and police acting as agents.... Comments?
    Completely different situation. That other thread was about trespass in places that are ostensibly open to the public such as retail stores, church parking lots, etc. None of that protocol applies to land that is clearly marked "No Trespassing", any more than it does to someone who enters your home uninvited.

  12. #12
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990
    I was camping at Millersvainia this week end, and the park rangers were doing a regular walk through to make sure stereos were turned down etc. Mine was a little loud (didn't realize it was after 10pm). So they stopped, and I asked for their interpretation while they were there. Very ambiguous at best for clarification. I was OCing my 1911 at the time, and they didn't say squat about that. Since my son, and I always go shooting together it would be clear he would be good for the "supervision" part.
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  13. #13
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    (snip)

    These kind of sections are also perfect examples of the principle that it sometimes is beneficial to talk to the police while in the field and being questioned.

    Assume a case where you are found to be in possession of a concealed pistol and you are not in your abode or fixed place of business.

    The officer decided to custodially arrest you and seize your firearm. He is in the process of putting you in handcuffs


    He has PC, having found you in possession of a concealed pistol (loaded and on your hip whether concealed under clothes or not is considered a concealed weapon in WA state, if carried IN A VEHICLE

    ***BUT*** you are returning home from target shooting at Range X, same range being a mile from where you have been pulled over. You have your targets you just shot (bitchen pattern) which are signed and dated (today) in the trunk, too. You also have your headphones in there, your shooting glasses and a receipt from some ammo you bought at the range, which is of course time/date stamped establishing your innocence. You also have your membership card showing you are enrolled as a member, in that trunk. Furthermore, the owner was working just an hour ago when you bought the ammo, and is reachable by phone and could confirm you had just been shooting at the range and had left just before the traffic stop.

    do you
    1) explain that you don't need a permit since you are returning from a range where you had been target shooting, and you have equipment in the trunk to prove that, in addition to having the phone number of the range, so the officer can call the range and confirm you were shooting there and you just left

    2) remain silent

    If you choose 2, you will be transported to jail, and spend a night there before you are released ROR the next day at first appearance

    If you choose 1, you will not be arrested and the officer will send you on your merry way


    If you choose 2, you will likely be able to prove you were at the range (witness testimony at a minimum), but the defense won't be as strong as having the officer see the stuff in your trunk a mile from the range, and having the witness alibi you at the scene whereas at a later date he could have been coached to lie about it (not likely, but possible). and you will still have suffered being arrested and booked (for valid pc since you didn't pipe up he had no way of knowing you were in compliance with the subsection about target shooting, range membership, etc

    I know what *I* would do. Any person who wouldn't do (1) is insane

    I;'ve had literally hundreds of times in street contacts where PC or developing PC was vitiated because the suspect talked and gave an alibi, showed me excupatory evidence, etc. Those cases NEVER get to a docket, so the cases you SEE are almost always examples where talking hurt the defendant. In the cases where it helped, it so happened in most cases that he never got arrested in the first place, let alone charged.

    I once caught a suspected burglar who neighbors had seen crawl through the back 2nd story window of a house. I couldn't get in contact with the homeowner and he had a different last name than the homeowners (as verfieid via IMAP).

    He actually was a cousin, who was staying at the house for the week and he was able to direct us to the guest room where items establishing his having moved in a couple of days ago was evident. So, he got unarrested

    If he hadn't spoken up, we would have to arrest him on PC for burglary and could hold him 72 hrs before having to release him (since w/o a victim statement yet, the PC would not be strong enough to CHARGE, but would be strong enough to arrest)

    *MOST* officers don't want to make a bad arrest and/or are perfectly willing to check out stuff like this, especially when it requires such minimal effort as unlocking a trunk or making a phone call.

    Fwiw, I was held at gunpoint once as an armed robbery suspect (with ample RAS) and you are damn skippy I talked to them during the stop and established my innocence/alibi.

    There are MANY situations where remaining silent is the most prudent course, ESPECIALLY if you are guilty. But there are plenty where it's in your favor to speak up.
    You forgot #3..

    "I know the law, you don't, wanna try me? I don't care if you think you can carry concealed without a permit, you need a permit if you're gonna carry concealed in MY town."
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •