• 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.

AG Opinion coming (hopefully)

J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

Well not exactly the opinion I was hoping for as it does not deal with the specific legalities of OC but rather the requirements needed for a terry stop. I was hoping it would be more to the terry stop applicabilites for nothing more than OC. The thing that bugs me is the "paraphrased" comment that is used to describe the question that Rep. Sells asked. It leads me to believe that they do not want to touch the open carry topic.

I am going to write Rep. Sells back and ask him to get clarification for open carry and the applicablility of a terry stop for nothing more than the mere open possesion of a holstered pistol.

http://joeroket.kaidok.net/stuff/AG_opinion_terry_stop.pdf
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

Well it isn't BS but it is things that we already have articulated to LE and they have agreed, for the most part. I'm going to do a little more work and see if I can get one that deals with the openly carrying of a firearm and how a terry stop would relate. That is the biggest stumbling block we have from what I have seen.
 
S

surfj9009

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2008
Messages
639
Location
Spokane, WA, ,
imported post

Well, it is definitely nice that their office included the opinion contained in State vs. Casad. It is too bad though that this isn't a bit more along the lines of what we would like to see. It is also too bad this is an informal.

It's cannon fodder. It's like a mighty oak. We just have to keep on swinging the axe before it falls, but it will eventually fall.

I would surmise the best thing to do would be to request another, formal opinion from the AG. Referencing this opinion but going into detail more specifically about the discussion we are looking for.

Thank you for taking the time to work on this process. Your repertoire with Mr. Sells seems to be a fairly effective channel of communication, and while slow:X, it is still a channel.

While it seems as though the AG office may be intentionally skirting around the issue, I think you should resubmit your request for a more specific opinion.

Keep on it! If you would please PM me your next letter to your rep, I can use it as an approach to my reps as well. They seem fairly friendly with these matters.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

If you read carefully there is a short sentence that acknowleges that it is legal to own and carry a gun in Washington. Because the next sentence advises that a permit is required to Conceal, that leads me to believe that they do recognize the right to open carry.

The issue remains that of evaluating the "Manner, Circumstances, and Time/Place" wording of the Statute that is left open to the interpretation of a LEO.

A better request would be for an opinion of what Manner, Circumstance, Time/Place would WARRANT alarm as well as a brief description of scenarios that would not.

(Actually, that is already in place in the opinions cited)
 
D

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

Your question involves the intersection of the constitutional guarantee prohibiting unreasonalble search and seizure and Washington laws regulating firearms.
Click to expand...

Uh, shouldn't he have mentioned Washington's constitutional protection regarding the owning and carrying of firearms?

The views expressed in this opinion are my own and do not represent a formal opinion of the Attorney General.
Click to expand...

So this is worth no more than a similar opinion written by a private attorney paid for out of your own pocket.
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

amlevin wrote:
If you read carefully there is a short sentence that acknowleges that it is legal to own and carry a gun in Washington. Because the next sentence advises that a permit is required to Conceal, that leads me to believe that they do recognize the right to open carry.

The issue remains that of evaluating the "Manner, Circumstances, and Time/Place" wording of the Statute that is left open to the interpretation of a LEO.

A better request would be for an opinion of what Manner, Circumstance, Time/Place would WARRANT alarm as well as a brief description of scenarios that would not.

(Actually, that is already in place in the opinions cited)
Click to expand...
I agree but I don't think they would be willing to touch the subject of what warrants alarm.
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

deanf wrote:
Your question involves the intersection of the constitutional guarantee prohibiting unreasonalble search and seizure and Washington laws regulating firearms.
Click to expand...

Uh, shouldn't he have mentioned Washington's constitutional protection regarding the owning and carrying of firearms?

The views expressed in this opinion are my own and do not represent a formal opinion of the Attorney General.
Click to expand...

So this is worth no more than a similar opinion written by a private attorney paid for out of your own pocket.
Click to expand...
Formal and informal opinions hold the same weight. They are all useless because they are meant for use by legislation to clarify laws and use the opinions to created new legislation if it opinion gives less than the intent they had originally wanted the law to have.
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

surfj9009 wrote:
Well, it is definitely nice that their office included the opinion contained in State vs. Casad. It is too bad though that this isn't a bit more along the lines of what we would like to see. It is also too bad this is an informal.

It's cannon fodder. It's like a mighty oak. We just have to keep on swinging the axe before it falls, but it will eventually fall.

I would surmise the best thing to do would be to request another, formal opinion from the AG. Referencing this opinion but going into detail more specifically about the discussion we are looking for.

Thank you for taking the time to work on this process. Your repertoire with Mr. Sells seems to be a fairly effective channel of communication, and while slow:X, it is still a channel.

While it seems as though the AG office may be intentionally skirting around the issue, I think you should resubmit your request for a more specific opinion.

Keep on it! If you would please PM me your next letter to your rep, I can use it as an approach to my reps as well. They seem fairly friendly with these matters.
Click to expand...
I will do that. I am drafting the letter now and for the next couple of days the seek clarification if a terry stop is warranted on the sole grounds that someone is openly carrying a firearm that is secured in a holster. I want to keep it as specific as possible because the AG does not like to address vague issues.
 
M

Morris

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
173
Location
North of Seattlle, South of Canada, Washington, US
imported post

The issue remains that of evaluating the "Manner, Circumstances, and Time/Place" wording of the Statute that is left open to the interpretation of a LEO.
--------------

Therein lies the problem. Not only do you have peace officer opinion but also the PA, DA or CA (prosecuting, district or city attorney). What a PA or officer in one city may interpret will be different than what a CA or officer in another interprets (using, say, Ellensberg versus Seattle, or King County versus Whitman County). You may have an officer who does not agree that a citizen is unduly alarmed but who is overruled by a supervisor and ordered to draft a report. The report is reviewed by an attorney and they can decide whether they interpret the report to mean there was a fear or alarm or there is no merit in the report or charge. Heck, I used to go round and round with a sergeant who ordered me to find some driver at fault at any accident I investigated and write a citation, whether it was correct or not.

Interpretation, without clear defenitions, specifics or guidelines lead to problems and the potential for abuse.
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

Morris wrote:
The issue remains that of evaluating the "Manner, Circumstances, and Time/Place" wording of the Statute that is left open to the interpretation of a LEO.
--------------

Therein lies the problem. Not only do you have peace officer opinion but also the PA, DA or CA (prosecuting, district or city attorney). What a PA or officer in one city may interpret will be different than what a CA or officer in another interprets (using, say, Ellensberg versus Seattle, or King County versus Whitman County). You may have an officer who does not agree that a citizen is unduly alarmed but who is overruled by a supervisor and ordered to draft a report. The report is reviewed by an attorney and they can decide whether they interpret the report to mean there was a fear or alarm or there is no merit in the report or charge. Heck, I used to go round and round with a sergeant who ordered me to find some driver at fault at any accident I investigated and write a citation, whether it was correct or not.

Interpretation, without clear defenitions, specifics or guidelines lead to problems and the potential for abuse.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why I want them to address a person openly carrying a firearm secured in a holster and if it is applicable to a terry stop. But as you put it the problem is with the "warrants cause for alarm" portion, even with an opinion it isopen to interpretation by the street officer and his superiors along with the prosecuting attorneys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top