• 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.

State House bars openly carried guns in public gallery

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
The House joines (sic) the Senate in barring openly carried guns from the chambers’ public-viewing areas in Olympia.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2025497927_gunshousegalleryxml.html

OLYMPIA — The state House has joined the Senate in prohibiting people from openly carrying firearms in the public viewing area located over the floor where lawmakers sit.

The decision was made Monday morning after a meeting between leaders from both sides of the aisle in that chamber, and also applies to openly carried knives. The House gallery rules will now include a line prohibiting “open-carried weapons such as guns, firearms, and blades.”

House Majority Leader Pat Sullivan, D-Covington, said the clarification of the rule banning demonstrations in the public galleries takes effect immediately, and that security staff have been notified and will hand out the list of restrictions to people who show up with openly carried weapons.

“This is about how we operate within the House framework that allows us to get our work done,” Sullivan said. “This isn’t a matter of Second Amendment rights. The fact you can’t bring a sign into the gallery, although you have a First Amendment right of free speech ... There are limitations. Within our rules, we believe we have the ability to restrict certain things that would distract from our ability to get work done.”

Sullivan said the attorney general’s office was consulted over the weekend regarding constitutional issues surrounding the decision.

“We believe that we’re on solid ground,” he said.

The move by the House comes just days after a similar decision by Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, a Democrat who serves as president of the Senate. Owen announced Friday that he considered openly carried guns the same as any prop used for a demonstration, which is not allowed under each chamber’s rules.

Owen’s decision came a day after a dozen protesters went to the House gallery with their weapons after a gun-rights rally on the Capitol steps protesting a new voter-approved gun background-check law.

People can still bring their concealed guns into the galleries, as long as they have a concealed pistol license.
 

BobR

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
391
Location
West Plains, ,
The question that begs to be asked is will there be lock boxes for those of us who "forget" our concealed carry license and cannot legally conceal our weapon? Or, will we be turned away and be prevented from watching our government in action. Just a passing thought.

bob
 

Grim_Night

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
776
Location
Pierce County, Washington
Or the other question is, will this pass constitutional muster. If they allow CC but prohibit OC, while OC is perfectly legal without a permit, are they in fact requiring that one get permission in order to exercise a protected right?

If they wanted to prohibit long guns, I personally would not see a problem with that. But I do have a problem with them prohibiting OC as a whole.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
The question that begs to be asked is will there be lock boxes for those of us who "forget" our concealed carry license and cannot legally conceal our weapon? Or, will we be turned away and be prevented from watching our government in action. Just a passing thought.

Or the other question is, will this pass constitutional muster. If they allow CC but prohibit OC, while OC is perfectly legal without a permit, are they in fact requiring that one get permission in order to exercise a protected right?

If they wanted to prohibit long guns, I personally would not see a problem with that. But I do have a problem with them prohibiting OC as a whole.

All fine questions. What a shame that a few folks who decided to brandish guns and otherwise create an unsafe and disruptive environment using their guns didn't give such questions (or several others) any thought before acting as they did.

In every area of human interactions, there are limits to what conduct society will tolerate. Those limits can be expanded by pushing a bit at a time until new norms are established. Thoughtlessly rushing headlong past all accepted social norms, ignoring or even being hostile to public opinion, is not the way to change public opinion.

Charles
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
utbagpiper;2122238In every area of human interactions said:
How does your theory work for Neo-Nazis?

If they 'gently push the norm' will they make 'progress' on their agenda?

We're California now. Anything about guns is facing a 'hostile public opinion.'
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
How does your theory work for Neo-Nazis?

If they 'gently push the norm' will they make 'progress' on their agenda?

I hope very poorly since I find their agenda abhorrent. But a glance at the last 40 years of history might show how it has worked for homosexuals. Also how it has worked for music, movies, TV shows and other material that might be subject to obscenity charges or at least ratings that would inhibit sales.

We're California now. Anything about guns is facing a 'hostile public opinion.'

Then demonstrations are not the proper course to go. I highly recommend reading, "What Makes You Think We Read the Bills" and "Confrontational Politics" both by H.L. Richardson. The key is to elect pro-RKBA legislators. And in some cases, that needs to be done without their position on RKBA even being a campaign issue.

I am really sorry that some folks think that all they have to do is walk around with a gun visible and that guarantees respect for RKBA will improve. That is clearly not universally applicable. And even where exposure will increase tolerance, it is but one small piece of actually making progress on laws affecting RKBA.

At some point, you have to win elections or else everything else is for naught.

Charles
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
House bans open carry in its gallery as SHOT Show opens in Las Vegas

The firearms world is focused on the annual Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show, which opens Tuesday in Las Vegas, but not so much that it is entirely overlooking today’s decision by the Washington State House of Representatives to ban the open carry of firearms in its visitor’s gallery.

http://www.examiner.com/article/house-bans-open-carry-its-gallery-as-shot-show-opens-las-vegas
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
I hasten to add that far too many who presume to justify boorish conduct have never read farther than the title of Richardson's "Confrontational Politics". The title is, IMO, rather unfortunate because it leads the non-reader to assume that rude, boorish, or other anti-social behavior is either necessary or even helpful to advancing political agendas.

The thesis of the book is to help legislators understand that their votes on bills will directly affect how gun owners vote in November. But interestingly, when the principles of the book are properly put into action, one almost never mentions directly how people will vote in November. When the tactics and principles are implemented properly (which takes a bit of work to build the necessary organizations/coalitions and keep them functioning), the connection becomes self-evident. If the connection is not self-evident, nothing else can be done using the tactics in the book.

Charles
 
Last edited:

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
House bans open carry in its gallery as SHOT Show opens in Las Vegas

The firearms world is focused on the annual Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show, which opens Tuesday in Las Vegas, but not so much that it is entirely overlooking today’s decision by the Washington State House of Representatives to ban the open carry of firearms in its visitor’s gallery.

http://www.examiner.com/article/house-bans-open-carry-its-gallery-as-shot-show-opens-las-vegas

Profit!
 

golddigger14s

Activist Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,068
Location
Lawton, OK USA
From WSP:
"Well folks, more unfortunate and disturbing news today. My phone call to the WSP was returned this afternoon by a Lt. in the Special Operations division. He asked me how he could help and so I asked him very plainly this question: Will the WSP be enforcing the arbitrary new rules established by the House and Senate leadership with regards to open carry in the galleries, or would they be enforcing existing law as outlined in the RCW's and Article I, Section 24 of the WA State Constitution? His response was that the WSP looked into it and believe that there is a strong precedent for adopting rules like this. His examples included bringing in a "sign on a stick that could be fashioned into a weapon" or "certain backpacks that can scratch the chairs". He went on further to say that they will be enforcing the new rules but will "go out of their way to ensure everyone that shows up understands those rules". He said they do not want to make arrests but stated plainly that if there are individuals that demonstrate non-compliance with the rules that they will make arrests.

Tyranny is alive and well in Olympia, folks. A select few politicians have opted to defy the state constitution and decades of the practice by citizens of open carrying in the galleries and now they've got the muscle to enforce it behind them. Make no mistake, this IS how liberty dies.

I encourage everyone to write and/or call our 2A friendly representatives like Lynda Wilson, Liz Pike, Matthew Shea, Elizabeth Scott, and others and ask them what they are doing to fight this selective disenfranchisement."
 

SovereigntyOrDeath

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Coeur D Alene, Idaho
From WSP:
"Well folks, more unfortunate and disturbing news today. My phone call to the WSP was returned this afternoon by a Lt. in the Special Operations division. He asked me how he could help and so I asked him very plainly this question: Will the WSP be enforcing the arbitrary new rules established by the House and Senate leadership with regards to open carry in the galleries, or would they be enforcing existing law as outlined in the RCW's and Article I, Section 24 of the WA State Constitution? His response was that the WSP looked into it and believe that there is a strong precedent for adopting rules like this. His examples included bringing in a "sign on a stick that could be fashioned into a weapon" or "certain backpacks that can scratch the chairs". He went on further to say that they will be enforcing the new rules but will "go out of their way to ensure everyone that shows up understands those rules". He said they do not want to make arrests but stated plainly that if there are individuals that demonstrate non-compliance with the rules that they will make arrests.

Tyranny is alive and well in Olympia, folks. A select few politicians have opted to defy the state constitution and decades of the practice by citizens of open carrying in the galleries and now they've got the muscle to enforce it behind them. Make no mistake, this IS how liberty dies.

I encourage everyone to write and/or call our 2A friendly representatives like Lynda Wilson, Liz Pike, Matthew Shea, Elizabeth Scott, and others and ask them what they are doing to fight this selective disenfranchisement."

Who is in charge of these numbskulls who think usurping the WA Constitution is part of their job description. It is this kind of behavior that makes one suspicious of "law enforcement". They make a willful choice to enforce a rule over a law. Don't they understand one can disobey an unlawful order, or do they even care?
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Who is in charge of these numbskulls who think usurping the WA Constitution is part of their job description. It is this kind of behavior that makes one suspicious of "law enforcement". They make a willful choice to enforce a rule over a law. Don't they understand one can disobey an unlawful order, or do they even care?

A real shame that the numbskulls presumable on "our side" didn't give one-tenth the amount of thought to the likely consequences of their insufferable and even illegal conduct as we'd like the police and legislators to give to their decisions.

Public perception matters.

Put more clearly, exactly how many legislators will have a harder time winning re-election if they support this new ban, or at least don't actively oppose it? Especially in light of what happened?

Charles
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
According to some guy from Utah that plays bagpipes liberty dies from people exercising their rights in ways they don't agree with.

Again, IF the protestors violated the law, then enforce the law as written. The fault for further restricting the carrying of firearms lies squarely, 100% on the legislature. All the legislature had to do was sit down with the Washington State Patrol and hash out what violated the law and what didn't and insist on enforcing the law as written and leave it at that.
Makes sense. Arrest the offenders or send them summons. Go to trial and put them in jail right? Justice served?
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
According to some guy from Utah that plays bagpipes liberty dies from people exercising their rights in ways they don't agree with.

Again, IF the protestors violated the law, then enforce the law as written. The fault for further restricting the carrying of firearms lies squarely, 100% on the legislature. All the legislature had to do was sit down with the Washington State Patrol and hash out what violated the law and what didn't and insist on enforcing the law as written and leave it at that.

+1
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
What do you think should happen IF they broke the law?
A strict interpretation should not have been held (and it wasn't). It was clear that these gentleman were protesting. I think the cops should have done exactly what they did. Nothing.

IF anything and thats a big IF, the dude kept molesting his firearm and the cops knew they had PC to charge/arrest and they felt it was a danger (WHICH MANY HERE AND PEOPLE PRESENT THERE CLEARLY FELT THEY WERE A DANGER) then thy should have been asked to leave. Wsp should have approached them calmly and explained "Sir we've had several complaints and we've witnessed you violate xxxxxxx several times. I'm kindly asking you to leave for the safety of all present. I/we can charge you but we are really not looking to do that. I understand you are here protesting and want to be heard but your becoming a danger. So please leave the premises".

Again that's if the PC existed, which if you read this thread ALL but maybe 2 dudes appear to think they were in violation.

No need to escalate the situation. Come in like a lamb and escalate only if required. By KNOWING you have the law on your side and merely asking for them to leave if/when they get rowdy then you have a firm standing (legally and MORALLY) on which to base your actions (arrest or physical confrontation).

No need for WSP to stir up storm (LIKE YOU WANT THEM TO BY ARRESTING). In a situation like this cost/benefit is key. What is the benefit of arresting them? They would be removed and everyone else present would be SAFE. What is the cost? Who knows but could be severe. Too many mouth breathers (that's SOLEY referring to the dudes chambering rounds in the building and the dude carrying like he's on patrol) and guns around.

By NOT arresting they allowed the citizens to protest (as they should) and shoot themselves (the citizens) in foot. No need to be the big bad dudes in "costumes". You give enough rope to SOME people and they will gladly tie the noose and hang themselves with it while self proclaiming they are heroes the whole way down.

For the record yet AGAIN the "costumed agent" is here preaching inaction towards citizens and yet AGAIN we have "patriotic heroes" calling for their own fellow citizens to be arrested to prove a "point".

Does anyone else see the trend here?
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
For the record yet AGAIN the "costumed agent" is here preaching inaction towards citizens and yet AGAIN we have "patriotic heroes" calling for their own fellow citizens to be arrested to prove a "point".

Does anyone else see the trend here?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
Bonus_marchers_05510_2004_001_a.gif


jb_modern_parks_1_m.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots
6134116.png


a7a4a3b6-bf4b-11e3-_585453c.jpg


Yeah, I kinda do see a trend
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
That's the best you have as a rebuttal? A link to war veterans wanting their just pay?

Its a sign of how weak your argument is.

War veterans marching to get their promised money+DISPERSAL (with shots fired) does NOT equal dudes loading guns in a unsafe manner + NO ACTION FROM THE POLICE.

With that, I think I'll give you the rest of your rope and let you step off. Don't trip on the way down brother. [emoji39]
 
Top