Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: Stopped today by Poulsbo PD (Kitsap County)

  1. #1
    Regular Member eBratt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fort Collins Area, CO
    Posts
    271

    Post imported post

    Sorry this is so long, but I wanted to be thorough.

    Disclaimer: It is now almost four hours after this took place and some of the finer details are starting to blur slightly. I will do my best to note when I don't quite recall something completely.

    Date: Oct. 4, 2007

    Time: Approximately 10am

    Dress: Jeans and a yellow t-shirt

    Firearm: Springfield XD9, 4" Service Model carried strongside (right hip) in a Blackhawk CQC Serpa

    Initial Contact:My wife and I were out geocaching today (Oct 10). At approximately 10 am we were leaving a small park off of 4th Ave in our minivan when I noticed a marked Poulsbo PD SUV approaching us in oncoming traffic. Upon passing the SUV, I noticed the officer talking into his microphone and subsequently activating his emergency lights. As there was no one in front of him, I felt fairly certain he was interested in me. As I noticed him turning around in the middle of the street, all doubt left.

    I proceeded to pull over to the side of the road and waited for the officer to finish turning around and catch up to me. I figured that I had nothing to hide as I was not engaging in any illegal behavior and it would be courteous to the officer to not make this encounter any more difficult than it needed to be.

    As expected, he pulled in behind me. I had already rolled my window down and greeted the officer verbally when he began to approach. He was all business and slowed his approach at the back of my vehicle, kept his hand near his gun (I didn't specifically notice if he ever placed it on his gun, but I did notice that it was at least near it). He asked me if I was armed and upon my response in the affirmative, asked me to exit the vehicle.

    By this point, a second officer had arrived and was looking in the windows of the passenger side of the minivan. My wife politely waved while keeping her hands in plain view and my son, well, he's one so he just kind of stared. The first officer asked me if I had a concealed weapons license. I indicated I did and he proceeded to ask to view them. I indicated that they were in my left back pocket. I removed the cards from my wallet and handed them to him. At this piont the second officer had joined us. The first officer compared the name on my carry license to that on my DL. He asked me if I was visiting. I was confused by this as both licenses indicate a Poulsbo address and I stated such. He clarified to mean that he was referring to my activity as the park. I did not feel it was his business what specifically I was doing so I simply agreed that I was visiting the park. He returned the carry license and then the second officer engaged me in conversation while the first officer appeared to call in my DL to check validity and probably for wants/warrants as well.

    Dialogue: The second officer, whose badge read as "Detective", explained to me that if you do not have a carry permit, you can carry a firearm openly. He then explained that if you do have a carry permit, you have to carry concealed. I politely explained that I was somewhat familiar with firearms laws and asked him if he could show me that law, as I was not aware of it (the polite way of my saying that I think he is wrong). He looked slightly surprised that I was not simply immediately compliant. He said that he didn't have a copy of the laws with him. I replied that having read through most of the state's firearms laws, that he is absolutely correct that without a carry license, one must ensure that the weapon is visible but that with a carry license, there was no legal requirement to keep the firearm concealed. I don't recall him arguing this point.

    The first officer had rejoined us by this point, returned my DL, and remained relatively quiet for the remainder of my discussion with the detective.

    The detective then explained that they had gotten a call from someone who saw me with a gun and indicated that when people see someone with a gun and don't see a badge, they get nervous and call the police. I stated that I understood that without indicating that I agreed that people should do so.

    He then pointed out that by my carrying openly and panicing people, it could be considered a nuisance call (I can't quite recall exactly the terminology he used...I thought it was nuisance. It was not disturbing the peace.) and that that would be violation of the law. It doesn't sound it here, but the way he phrased it lead me right to thinking that he was referring to his vague recollection of our dear old friend RCW 9.41.270. So, I simply explained that I thought he was referring to that statute and indicated the necessary points that must be satisfied for a violation of it to have occurred. I asked what I was doing that warranted alarm. The first officer pointed out that someone was alarmed by my behavior. I explained more in depth that in order for me to be guilty of breaking that law, the manner, time, place, and circumstances would all must point to cause to be alarmed. I asked what about the circumstances and my manner of carry warranted alarm. At this point, the detective asked if I was a lawyer, to which I responded no, while trying to stifle a grin as I took that as him acknowledging that I knew the law he was talking about.

    Here's where the questioning got interested. He asked if I was part of a free state project or another group (I can't remember which one he asked about) that is libertarian principles based. I indicated that I was not. He then asked how many other contacts I have had with police like this. I indicated that I have been openly carrying my firearm for several months and that this was the first time an officer had made contact with me regarding it. I explained that I also knew of several other people in Kitsap County who open carry on a regular basis who have never been stopped. At this point, he asked me if we have meetings. Red flags started going up all over the place in my mind when he asked this and I thought back to the 4th of July thread on this forum where someone suggested we march in the parade and that point was countered with RCW 38.40.120 where it makes illegal an "organizede body" organizing in public with firearms. Of course I didn't remember all of those details, but the gist of it jumped to mind.

    Having never attended an OC picnic or restaurant gathering, I indicated that I had never met any of them in person. He asked how I knew them and indicated that there is a forum that we frequent, the purpose of which is to help one another stay abreast of open carry laws and issues in Washington. He then asserted in a clarifying manner that we do meet. I indicated that it was simply a website and that we no more have met than people who happen to frequent the same website to discuss nice parks to visit. In retrospect, I think he thought public gathering when I said forum and not internet forum.

    At this point the questioning quickly died off and the first officer returned to his vehicle. The second officer, the detective, politely excused himself and made to leave. I thanked him for his time and started to turn to get in my car when I remembered to ask their names. The detective stated his name and turned so I could see the name tag on his uniform and told me the last name of the officer who had already returned to his vehicle.

    I again thanked him, returned to my vehicle, and we parted ways.

    Again, I am making the disclaimer that this is somewhat fuzzy now and I may have inadvertantly transposed topics in the timeline or not gotten the exact details of how things were phrased correctly. I am in the market for a voice recorder but haven't purchased one yet.

    Debreif-the cons: The biggest one to me was the officer citing the law incorrectly trying to tell me that if I have a carry license, my gun must be concealed. The other big con is that I didn't have any training bulletins with me to share. I'll admit that after several months of OCing and not having a single contact, I got lazy in carrying the bulletins and didn't have one when I really could have used it.

    Debrief-the pros: The officers were very polite and professional. They did treat me with proper respect. And this didn't occur to me until I got home, but at no time was I disarmed! I have to give them full credit on that.

    Debrief-follow up: I will be sending letters to their chief explaining how polite and courteous the officers were while still being efficient in executing their duties. I will make no mention either way regarding the mistakes on the law as I am not 100% certain of which officer said what things about the law. I am almost sure it was the detective, but not sure enough to include it in the letter. I will also express high praise for the respect with which I was treated both in being spoken to and in not being treated like a criminal and being disarmed. I am also going to send a note to each of the officers thanking them for the courtesy and respect, explaining that I hope that I was able to explain myself well but that in case I didn't that I have included a copy of a training bulletin or two so that they can undestand what I was trying to explain.

    So, comments and feedback from anyone? I am especially interested in comments about RCW 38.40.120 and the organizing in public of armed organizations. I am going to start a seperate thread that will specifically discuss that RCW, so try to keep this thread more general about the stop.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" - George Washington
    "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." - Mahatma Gandhi

    As always, insert standard IANAL disclaimer here.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    eBratt wrote:
    Date: Oct. 10, 2007
    So all this is going to happen next Wednesday? Did you get the winning lotto numbers too?

  3. #3
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    Ok, now that I’ve read it all, I think you did a good job handling the situation. They have apparently put a lot of thought into finding a chink in the armor, and felt confident that they had you on something. Their confidence will shake yours every time and make you wonder if you are doing something illegal. That a detective responded makes me wonder what they’re trying to build against OC.



    Remember, you really don’t have any requirement to engage them in a conversation (even though I have three times), you can simply stop answering and ask if you are free to leave.

  4. #4
    Regular Member eBratt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fort Collins Area, CO
    Posts
    271

    Post imported post

    Thanks for catching the date error. I have some minor surgery on my wrist (non gun hand) coming up on the 10th so that date has been on my mind.

    It happened today.

    The frustrating thing about deciding whether to speak to them is that if they aren't going to be a jerk, I'd hate to be one. I would hate to give them the impression that all OCers are rude and antagonistic towards the police. I know there will be some who say that I shouldn't feel bad about exercising my rights, but image is image and within our rights or not, it would come across as being a jerk.

    Lonnie, I'd be interested in making sure a training bulletin gets issued in the Poulsbo department so as to ensure that the above confusion doesn't happen again. Any chance you can help guide me through getting it done?
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" - George Washington
    "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." - Mahatma Gandhi

    As always, insert standard IANAL disclaimer here.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    154

    Post imported post

    Wow, good experiences all around...nice.

  6. #6
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Despite the positive aspects of this "encounter" I strongly suggest you make a formal complaint regarding the stop and possible 4th Amend. violating seizure of your person. The stopping officer used his police powers to forcibly stop and detainedyou (activating his overhead emergency lights) for the purpose of what investigation? To tell you you must conceal? Not a crime. To see if you were the person open carrying? Not a crime.

    He could claim he was investigating the "alarm" concern but is that a misdemeanor or felony charge in Washington? Was the caller anonymous? Were there enough elements to justify a "Terry" investigative stop?

    Please don't encourage them by not complaining. Do be appreciative of their "fair tone" but keep in mind they were trying to intimidate you into CCing with false legal advise.

    All persons who value their freedom should have a recorder whether carrying or not. Your liberty some day may depend on proving your story. Do get one.

    And +1 to your savvy and educated answers but as you detected the detective's "probing" questions of your activities do feel free to respectfully decline to answer next time.


  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    He could claim he was investigating the "alarm" concern but is that a misdemeanor or felony charge in Washington?
    It is a misdemeanor.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  8. #8
    Regular Member eBratt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fort Collins Area, CO
    Posts
    271

    Post imported post

    The misdemeanor is only if the circumstances, manner, time, and place all warrant alarm. Me standing in a park in broad dayling making no aggressive movements or intimations hardly satisfies any one of those criterion let alone all of them.

    I wonder if knowing that an individual was openly armed and then drove off in a vehicle is [edit: pardon my mistake, not probable cause] reasonable suspicion for detainment in order to investigate whether I was committing a crime by carrying in a car without a carry license. I don't believe they can simply pull anyone over who is driving to see if they have a driver's license, but that being a violation of the motor vehicle code and not a misdemeanor may not be comparing apples to apples.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" - George Washington
    "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." - Mahatma Gandhi

    As always, insert standard IANAL disclaimer here.

  9. #9
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    cato wrote:
    He could claim he was investigating the "alarm" concern but is that a misdemeanor or felony charge in Washington?
    It is a misdemeanor.

    I don't know Washington law, but as perhapsthe OPknows, a detention and arrest for most misdemeanors requires the witnessing person, officer or private person, to do the "arresting". Otherwise only a report can be taken by the officersfor a warrant to later be issued.

    For theofficer to stop you he would have to be doing so on the caller's arrest authority generally or to detain only until the caller could be contacted to identify you and "make" the arrest. I don't know if Washington has a private persons arrest procedure but that is the only justification I could think of forthe stop. It appears clear from the information sharedhere that was not their purpose or probable cause for the stop thereby making it an illegal detention.

    A FOIA should be done to better illuminate the circumstances and nature of the call.


  10. #10
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    eBratt wrote:
    He then pointed out that by my carrying openly and panicing people, it could be considered a nuisance call (I can't quite recall exactly the terminology he used...I thought it was nuisance. It was not disturbing the peace.) and that that would be violation of the law. It doesn't sound it here, but the way he phrased it lead me right to thinking that he was referring to his vague recollection of our dear old friend RCW 9.41.270. So, I simply explained that I thought he was referring to that statute and indicated the necessary points that must be satisfied for a violation of it to have occurred. I asked what I was doing that warranted alarm. The first officer pointed out that someone was alarmed by my behavior. I explained more in depth that in order for me to be guilty of breaking that law, the manner, time, place, and circumstances would all must point to cause to be alarmed. I asked what about the circumstances and my manner of carry warranted alarm.
    Just because the law says that I cannot drive a motor vehicle while drunk, doesn’t mean a police officer can read just a part of the law and claim it says that I cannot drive a motor vehicle.

    The statute in question doesn’t say, “…causes alarm” and it doesn’t even say “…warrants alarm”, it says “warrants alarm for the safety of others”. A firearm in a holster cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, endanger the safety of others.

    Remember that for next time.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    eBratt wrote:
    SNIP The frustrating thing about deciding whether to speak to them is that if they aren't going to be a jerk, I'd hate to be one. I would hate to give them the impression that all OCers are rude and antagonistic towards the police. I know there will be some who say that I shouldn't feel bad about exercising my rights, but image is image and within our rights or not, it would come across as being a jerk.
    Don't be confused by a carefully controlled demeanor on the part of the police. Its entirely possible for them towalk all over your rights while calling you"sir" and being pleasant.

    When they have no reason for a detention, and even when they do, they need your voluntary cooperation with questions. Smartcops know they'll get more voluntary answers if they are polite and gentle. The smoother the questioning, the more alert one wants to be. I know you were responding in the context of future stops. Lets use thisstop just as an example. One of these intruded into your 1st Amend rights to assembly-- about having meetings, Free State project, etc. Unless he suspects you of espionage for China,being in the Mafia,or something, which groups you associate with have no bearing on this stop or any other stop. That he asked about the Free State Project, an entirely legitimate activity, raised my antennae through the stratosphere.Was he gathering intel on the expansion and activities of such a group?Was he just trying to find out if you're member because that would quickly tell him you are probably OK? A citizen does not need membership in a group like this in order to OC.

    A citizen can go right to the line and stand up for his rights, andnot be a jerk. Genuine professionals will recognize it; the rest need the lesson. See the videos at www.flexyourrights.org

    Of course, having your family with you affects your choices.

    Isecond Cato'srecommendations above. First, before sending the complaint, I might send a Freedom of Informationrequest for 911 call recording to see what the police were told and what the dispatcher told the caller. I might also request police car text messages related to the stop. Once that is in hand, you'll be able to tell a little better, as Cato points out, whether the police had reasonable suspicion to stop (seize) you in the first place, and whether they had reason to keep you stopped. Once you know that, you'll know what to include or leave out of your complaint. And you'll know what evidence the police can't pretend doesn't exist.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    I'm wondering if you were in a Poulsbo City park, or a Kitsap County Park. The reason I ask is that Kitsap County Code 10.12.080 prohibits carry of firearms in Kitsap County Parks:

    It is unlawful to shoot, fire or explode any firearm, firecracker, fireworks, torpedo or explosive of any kind or to carry any firearm or to shoot or fire any air gun, BB gun, bow and arrow or use any slingshot in any park, except the park director may authorize archery, slinging, fireworks and firing of small bore arms at designated times and places suitable for their use. (emphasis added)


    On September 8, I wrote a letter to four county officials in an attempt to get this changed. I was unsuccessful. Today, I mailed four more letters. The code obviously has been preempted and repealed by RCW 9.41.290, but the fact that is still in the code might cause a needless arrest.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    159

    Post imported post

    Ajetpilot wrote:
    I'm wondering if you were in a Poulsbo City park, or a Kitsap County Park. The reason I ask is that Kitsap County Code 10.12.080 prohibits carry of firearms in Kitsap County Parks:...
    I immediately had the same question about the jurisdiction over the park. I notice that the officers did not try to use that ordinance as probable cause for the stop, let alone charge the OP with it. If it was a county park, this could be good news.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    I'd file a formal complaint. Even if the officers were not rude or unpleasent, it would still be nice to see what the Chief of Police has to say on this subject. I'd like to see some office training memos on this side of the water.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Post imported post

    I had a conversation with one of the Kitsap Deputy Sheriff today concerning open carry and their "training", this deputy, whom I have known and worked with for over 20 years, said they had no formal training regarding OC. He stated that there were some cities that had ordinances prohibiting OC. I explained the pre emption to him and he said he would see what the county had done or would be doing.

    Earlier I spoke with the manager of the Sportsmans Warehouse, (My employer) and his response was for the most part positive. He said if it was noticed, they would "probably" politely ask the preson to unload the firearm and if they declined, they would be allowed to continue their business un mollested.

    This is not from the corporate HQ, and only from the Silverdale store. the stores in Lacy and Federal way were not asked.

    Dr of Triggernometry

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    You did well. Good job.

  17. #17
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    I think that when the questioning "turned interesting" would have been a good time to stop answering questions and start asking "am I free to go?".



  18. #18
    Regular Member eBratt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fort Collins Area, CO
    Posts
    271

    Post imported post

    I just spoke with an attorney. This was an unreimbursed conversation and seemed to be "freindly" legal advice, so I will not use his name unless he would like me to. He indicated he read this thread and he, if he is so inclined, is welcome to identify himself as the person I consulted with.

    I bring this up to throw his thoughts into the pot of discussion. He started by expressing that the threshold for Terry stops is extremely low. It was his opinion after reading the details as I expressed them in this forum that it is a tossup on whether that threshold was met in my case. He indicated that the time that they kept me there might have exceeded a reasonable ammount of time. He said that depending on the information the caller provided, for example, if the caller had indicated that I was brandishing the gun, the police may have been acting under that premise (faulty as it was).

    I proceeded to ask him about the grounds for a stop if one was carrying on foot and not engaged in any illegal behavior. He replied that in that case, he didn't feel that the threshold would be met, but that the police could easily articulate a suspicion such as "he was acting furtive," that would suffice for a Terry stop. It was his feeling though that simple stop and ID requests to ensure open carry was legal merely on the grounds that you are open carrying are not legal.

    In my case, he said that he felt I would be hard pressed to find a lawyer that would take the police to task on the incident as the threshold for Terry was so closely met.

    As he was very gracious about discussing the matter with me and not requesting payment, I didn't want to take up too much of his time and thus didn't ask about the organized body with firearms question.

    So there you have it.

    I am still planning on dropping off the letters and am still planning on including the training bulletins in the ones for the officers as a gentle reminder of what current firearm law are regarding OC.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" - George Washington
    "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." - Mahatma Gandhi

    As always, insert standard IANAL disclaimer here.

  19. #19
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    Pa. Patriot wrote:
    I think that when the questioning "turned interesting" would have been a good time to stop answering questions and start asking "am I free to go?".

    +1.

    Also, you still had a decent stop and "performed" well under pressure. I also personally think the officer asking questions stepped over the line with his questioning. As I read more and more, I couldn't help but imagine him with a swastika on his shoulder like a Gestapo flunkie. "Pay-pah's Plees!"
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  20. #20
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    eBratt wrote:
    As he was very gracious about discussing the matter with me and not requesting payment, I didn't want to take up too much of his time and thus didn't ask about the organized body with firearms question.
    Please take a look at my response on your other thread: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/5112.html

    I think the question by the officer is him trying to apply that RCW, while in actuality, pretty much everyone in the state that is legal to own a firearm is legal to "organize" with them, due to being part of the "unorganized militia". Kinda funny how that's a bit of a contradiction in terms, but I'm sure it could be easily argued in your/our favor.
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  21. #21
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    eBratt wrote:
    He indicated that the time that they kept me there might have exceeded a reasonable ammount of time.
    Speaking to the reasonable length of time issue, it’s important to remember that if you’re engaging them in a conversation (or debate) while they are detaining you, they won’t see even two hours as ‘unreasonable’. If you simply refuse to speak to them, they will have to release you much sooner.

    Now, I’m not advocating either way of doing it; I have a bit of experience in this. I think if it were to happen to me again, I would cease discussing it the moment they admitted it was legal.

    Officer: “I know open carry is legal but why do you…”

    Me: “Am I free to leave?”

    If you’re discussing or debating the issue, they will take as long as they feel they need to convince you that you’re wrongand they’re right; at least until one of two things happens, they realize they’re at the point of impasse, or a better/more important call comes in on the radio.

    Just food for thought.

  22. #22
    Regular Member eBratt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Fort Collins Area, CO
    Posts
    271

    Post imported post

    And in the future, the moment they move questioning away from the legality of OC, I will end the encounter as quickly as they permit. The more I think about it, the more I think I humored their questioning too long.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" - George Washington
    "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." - Mahatma Gandhi

    As always, insert standard IANAL disclaimer here.

  23. #23
    Regular Member sccrref's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
    Posts
    741

    Post imported post

    RCW 38.40.120 Authorized military organizations.
    No organized body other than the recognized militia organizations of this state, armed forces of the United States, students of educational institutions where military science is a prescribed part of the course of instruction or bona fide veterans organizations shall associate themselves together as a military company or organize or parade in public with firearms: PROVIDED, That nothing herein shall be construed to prevent authorized parades by the organized militia of another state or armed forces of foreign countries. Any person participating in any such unauthorized organization shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
    IANAL but MHO is that to get together for a dinner/picinic etc does not meet any of the definitions for organize or parade. Further, lack of a legal definition of thewords organize or paradewould cause a normal person to use the dictionary definitions, soas long as you are not purporting yourselves as a military company, or every member of the org is not involved with setting up/planning the event (never have known everyone in an org to be involved with much less attending an event) it would be hard pressed to prove you were guilty of breaking this RCW. That typed, I would still shut the hell up when those questions were posed to me and ask if I was being detained.

    I think under the circumstances, you did very well.

  24. #24
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    eBratt wrote:

    He said that depending on the information the caller provided, for example, if the caller had indicated that I was brandishing the gun, the police may have been acting under that premise (faulty as it was).
    Correct, everything hinges on the call. But if brandishing or worsehad been reported I suspect the questioning would have taken a different tact in order to get a self incriminating statement to assist in getting a warrant,provided the caller didn't want to do a private persons arrest. (again I don't know Wash. law.)


    In my case, he said that he felt I would be hard pressed to find a lawyer that would take the police to task on the incident as the threshold for Terry was so closely met.


    My gut feeling is that they didn't meet the "Terry" threshold but for a law suit your damages are little. You could win a moral victory but at the expense of $$$$$to see it through if they fight it. If you're daddy warbucks go for it.

    More with less expense can be accomplished with a formal complaint. That takes internal resources to investigate and puts that officer under scrutiny. With this in his package it will discourage him from doing it again for fear of a similar complaint. This applies to both the stopping officer and questioning detective. And it can still discourage this behavior in the future even if no discipline is handed out. Nobody likes to be questioned by IA.

    You letters are a good way to communicate your concerns to the brass but do add a complaint for good measure as it sends the message that you are serious about stopping this abuse of authority. The next officer may do a felony stop and get someone hurt over nothing. Please send a strong but polite message after getting the recorded call for service tape, dispatch info, along with any pre and post stop computer messaging and radio traffic to be sure their illegality.

    Keep in mind that without a valid reason to stop they can't even search your name for warrants. Now, having stopped you, your name will most likely forever be in there internal computer system as associated with a "man with a gun call". If the officer completed the call by adding "uncooperative subject with firearm" in the comments, since you didn't take his advise, that will influence all future contact you might have withthat department. Just food for thought.









    .


    Attached Images Attached Images

  25. #25
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    sccrref wrote:
    RCW 38.40.120 Authorized military organizations.
    No organized body other than the recognized militia organizations of this state, armed forces of the United States, students of educational institutions where military science is a prescribed part of the course of instruction or bona fide veterans organizations shall associate themselves together as a military company or organize or parade in public with firearms: PROVIDED, That nothing herein shall be construed to prevent authorized parades by the organized militia of another state or armed forces of foreign countries. Any person participating in any such unauthorized organization shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
    And why aren't they arresting all military re-enactors!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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