Machine guns and silencers and DDs in WA

imported post

Nitrox314 wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

The civil authorities can't touch you for what you doand while on active dutyunless the military saysthey can. That's really the only way a armed force member can be held accountable for anything they do even off duty.

Click to expand...

Sorry Bear, but thats not quite accurate. That is only true if the offense takes place on a military facility. Local Law Enforcement as well as State have jurisdiction if the offence occurs outside the military facility. I know this as as well as I can and is in my eyes asfact (Personal Observations in the end). I have done my time in the service, and I still serve in the reserves. I work on a base as a civ contractor. I have credentials for this knowledge. Now, that being said, NCIS here also works off the facilities in cooperation with the local law enforcement to bust military people for illegal activities against the UCMJ when offences occur outside the facility. Usually this takes place when a military member or family is in danger. But if a military person was to walk into a bar and shoot ten civilians, he could be held by the local law enforcement and courts. The person could be charged in state courts and in Military because they have different laws that were broken, so I do not think itwouldfall under double jepordy.

Hell, I might be wrong about all this, but this is all from what I have seen in my time.

Click to expand...

Unless the military would rather have it handled by the civil authorities then it won't be. You are the military's 24/7 regardless of where you are on or off base and they prefer to keep the little things off the soldiers record, hence let the civilauthorities deal with the traffic infractions, etc. But if you are irreplaceable or required for some mission, they can come take you out of jail and away you go and the civil authorities have no way to stop them. I spent better than 10 years active duty and about 4 in the reserve and National Guard before becoming too disabled to continue and I got high enough up the ladder to know what my options were if one of my people screwed the pouch and I still needed him to complete the mission. Generally the UCMJ covers you 24/7 before civil law does unless you walk into felony territory, then it gets harder.

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

Nitrox314 wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

The civil authorities can't touch you for what you doand while on active dutyunless the military saysthey can. That's really the only way a armed force member can be held accountable for anything they do even off duty.

Click to expand...

Sorry Bear, but thats not quite accurate. That is only true if the offense takes place on a military facility. Local Law Enforcement as well as State have jurisdiction if the offence occurs outside the military facility. I know this as as well as I can and is in my eyes asfact (Personal Observations in the end). I have done my time in the service, and I still serve in the reserves. I work on a base as a civ contractor. I have credentials for this knowledge. Now, that being said, NCIS here also works off the facilities in cooperation with the local law enforcement to bust military people for illegal activities against the UCMJ when offences occur outside the facility. Usually this takes place when a military member or family is in danger. But if a military person was to walk into a bar and shoot ten civilians, he could be held by the local law enforcement and courts. The person could be charged in state courts and in Military because they have different laws that were broken, so I do not think itwouldfall under double jepordy.

Hell, I might be wrong about all this, but this is all from what I have seen in my time.

Click to expand...

Unless the military would rather have it handled by the civil authorities then it won't be. You are the military's 24/7 regardless of where you are on or off base and they prefer to keep the little things off the soldiers record, hence let the civilauthorities deal with the traffic infractions, etc. But if you are irreplaceable or required for some mission, they can come take you out of jail and away you go and the civil authorities have no way to stop them. I spent better than 10 years active duty and about 4 in the reserve and National Guard before becoming too disabled to continue and I got high enough up the ladder to know what my options were if one of my people screwed the pouch and I still needed him to complete the mission. Generally the UCMJ covers you 24/7 before civil law does unless you walk into felony territory, then it gets harder.

Click to expand...

Nitrox is quite right, as I have arrested many active duty military personnel.Several of them I have even gone on post to arrest. Depending on the seriousness of the charges, the Prosecutor may opt to let the military handle it if they are so inclined. The military is generally the harsher of the two "punishers" however. They can also face double jeopardy from local Police and then the military, as I've seen this happen as well.

imported post

Johnny Law wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

Nitrox314 wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

The civil authorities can't touch you for what you doand while on active dutyunless the military saysthey can. That's really the only way a armed force member can be held accountable for anything they do even off duty.

Click to expand...

Sorry Bear, but thats not quite accurate. That is only true if the offense takes place on a military facility. Local Law Enforcement as well as State have jurisdiction if the offence occurs outside the military facility. I know this as as well as I can and is in my eyes asfact (Personal Observations in the end). I have done my time in the service, and I still serve in the reserves. I work on a base as a civ contractor. I have credentials for this knowledge. Now, that being said, NCIS here also works off the facilities in cooperation with the local law enforcement to bust military people for illegal activities against the UCMJ when offences occur outside the facility. Usually this takes place when a military member or family is in danger. But if a military person was to walk into a bar and shoot ten civilians, he could be held by the local law enforcement and courts. The person could be charged in state courts and in Military because they have different laws that were broken, so I do not think itwouldfall under double jepordy.

Hell, I might be wrong about all this, but this is all from what I have seen in my time.

Click to expand...

Unless the military would rather have it handled by the civil authorities then it won't be. You are the military's 24/7 regardless of where you are on or off base and they prefer to keep the little things off the soldiers record, hence let the civilauthorities deal with the traffic infractions, etc. But if you are irreplaceable or required for some mission, they can come take you out of jail and away you go and the civil authorities have no way to stop them. I spent better than 10 years active duty and about 4 in the reserve and National Guard before becoming too disabled to continue and I got high enough up the ladder to know what my options were if one of my people screwed the pouch and I still needed him to complete the mission. Generally the UCMJ covers you 24/7 before civil law does unless you walk into felony territory, then it gets harder.

Click to expand...

Nitrox is quite right, as I have arrested many active duty military personnel.Several of them I have even gone on post to arrest. Depending on the seriousness of the charges, the Prosecutor may opt to let the military handle it if they are so inclined. The military is generally the harsher of the two "punishers" however. They can also face double jeopardy from local Police and then the military, as I've seen this happen as well.

Click to expand...

The military is not required to allow civil law officers on to their bases. They do so out of courtesy and cooperation. But they don't have to. I know that for a fact. Saw it done in Sheveport, LA abck in the late 60s. It's not smart to piss off a General and tell him there is nothing he can do about it. The General proved the Ole Country Sheriff wrong big time. Then he put he whole town off limits along with Bossier City to prove they weren't really in charge either.

imported post

Patents

11. C.J.S. Patents §§ 20, 25.] 2. A scheme to trick or deceive; a stratagem or artifice, as in the law relating to fraud. [Cases: Fraud

3.]



I think that the law is mistakenly written and being enforced the way it should have been written. However, I don't want to be on the receiving end of a selective enforcement of the law.

Blacks law dictionary, commonly used in the legal profession, defines a device as a mechanical invention. I believe that a silencer IS a mechanical invention. Therefore, I disagree that it is legal to use a silencer in WA. I agree that the police are, therefore, violating the law as there is no LE exemption.

Does this make sense? No. But hey, since when do all laws have to make sense? Next time you see ANYONE using a silencer, you could call the Sheriff's officeand inform them that people are using silencers on the range. Explain why it is illegal, quote the law, ask them to come and make an arrest. Or, if you really want to get ugly, perform a citizen's arrest... It would force the issue and the leg. might actually change the law! (of course, this will suck for the officer breaking the law... but, as they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse!)

imported post

joshmmm wrote:

Blacks law dictionary, commonly used in the legal profession, defines a device as a mechanical invention. I believe that a silencer IS a mechanical invention. Therefore, I disagree that it is legal to use a silencer in WA. I agree that the police are, therefore, violating the law as there is no LE exemption.

Or, if you really want to get ugly, perform a citizen's arrest... It would force the issue and the leg. might actually change the law! (of course, this will suck for the officer breaking the law... but, as they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse!)

Click to expand...

Next time you're at the range, why don't you give that bright idea a shot?

Let me know how that works out for you!

imported post

Johnny Law wrote:

joshmmm wrote:

Blacks law dictionary, commonly used in the legal profession, defines a device as a mechanical invention. I believe that a silencer IS a mechanical invention. Therefore, I disagree that it is legal to use a silencer in WA. I agree that the police are, therefore, violating the law as there is no LE exemption.

Or, if you really want to get ugly, perform a citizen's arrest... It would force the issue and the leg. might actually change the law! (of course, this will suck for the officer breaking the law... but, as they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse!)

Click to expand...

Next time you're at the range, why don't you give that bright idea a shot?

Let me know how that works out for you!

Click to expand...

If you couldn't tell, it wasn't meant seriously! (sorry if that didn't come through clearly, but I would hope nobody would seriously try that...)

imported post

joshmmm wrote:

If you couldn't tell, it wasn't meant seriously! (sorry if that didn't come through clearly, but I would hope nobody would seriously try that...)

Click to expand...

I had a feeling it was in jest, but there are some here who would say such a thing in earnest.

imported post

I have NEVER seen personally owned suppressed weapons firedon Fort Lewis and I have NEVER heard of soldiers in a duty status firing suppressed at a civilian "off-base" range unless they were from 1st Group or STSand were training with Pierce Metro SWAT in Bonney Lake. Where have you guys seen this?

Fort Lewis is federal property and jurisdiction,onlease from Pierce County. You will find all kinds of activity happening there and at McChord that is illegal in the state of Washington. For instance, when we had a heavy brigade here, M1A1's rolled to and in the training areas on their tracks. Once they went out the gate they had to be on HET's or commercial transportation. Soldiers train todrive at night with lights off using NVG's. People jump out of planes. At Madigan a doctor can even practice medicine without a license since a physician is not required to pass the state's board. An attorney can even practice law without being a member of the Bar.

Now, if a soldier botches a robbery at the Schooner and flees to Fort Lewis and Lakewood PD figures out where the BG went during the investigative pusuit, LPD (lots of ex-military by the way) is going to one of the gates and gain entry with no problems and go directly to 1st Groupand get the BG. If time allows they'll then be met by an MP supervisor and will go together to the unit and meet the CQ and 1st Sergeantto arrest the soldier unless LPD has called ahead and the MP's have already picked the BG up.

Oh yeah, military folks who are not on base, whether or not they are in duty status, are subject to local jurisdiction. That's why Steilacoom Public Safety officers can give big speeding tickets to soldiers going to, or coming from, work and Steilacoom gets the money not FLW. Now if a soldier beats his wife in quarters on post LPD isn't going to show up and arrest him, the MP's are and it's not the good ole days any more.

:monkeyGay (having or showing a merry, lively mood)monkey for levity.

imported post

Bear, you are correct for the most part, but here is the kicker. A military base can and does have more than one type of jurisdiction. Such is the case at the Shipyard in Bremerton. Exclusive Jurisdiction for the inducstrial area, and caocurrent jurisdiction for the on base housing area. Having retired from that location as a Fed Agent, I speak from personal knowledge. If the civilian authorities want an active duty person we had a "captive audience" as all that was necessary was for us to contact the command and have them escort the subject to our office, where we could turn them over to the civilian authorities. This would depend upon the given circumstances. Generally, when the Civ LEO needed to come into an area of concurrent jurisdiction, a courtesy call was made to our office and we would sometimes accompany them to make the arrest.


An agent assigned to a military base has the authority of thefacility commanding officer as far as requiring compliance for matters of Law enforcement.

imported post

Bear said: "You are the military's 24/7 regardless of where you are on or off base and they prefer to keep the little things off the soldiers record, hence let the civil authorities deal with the traffic infractions, etc. "


I don't know how long it's been since you were in the military, but the military absolutely does not do squat to shield you from the consequences of stupid, illegal off-base actions. In fact, as others have said, there is concurrent jurisdiction and the military may well charge you a second time on top of the civil authorities. They are supremely unlikely to remove you from local jurisdiction (which technically can be done is some cases) unless you are overseas in a country that has a poor reputation on civil rights or which is likely to give you an unfair trial for political reasons.

Local authorities may choose to let the military prosecute, or the military may let the civil authorities prosecute simply because it's easier and cheaper for them to let the others do it, and whoever has the hardest boner for screwing the accused gets to indulge their enthusiasm.

imported post

thebastidge wrote:

Bear said: "You are the military's 24/7 regardless of where you are on or off base and they prefer to keep the little things off the soldiers record, hence let the civil authorities deal with the traffic infractions, etc. "


I don't know how long it's been since you were in the military, but the military absolutely does not do squat to shield you from the consequences of stupid, illegal off-base actions. In fact, as others have said, there is concurrent jurisdiction and the military may well charge you a second time on top of the civil authorities. They are supremely unlikely to remove you from local jurisdiction (which technically can be done is some cases) unless you are overseas in a country that has a poor reputation on civil rights or which is likely to give you an unfair trial for political reasons.

Local authorities may choose to let the military prosecute, or the military may let the civil authorities prosecute simply because it's easier and cheaper for them to let the others do it, and whoever has the hardest boner for screwing the accused gets to indulge their enthusiasm.

Click to expand...

The point you are missing is that they can if they so choose too do so. Under normal circumstances, for public relations, being part of the community,etc, they don't do it, but they can and have.

imported post

I'm not missing any points.

On technical ground as well asall practical purposes, your original statement about active duty military getting a free pass ondisobeying the law,is full of it. Even if the military were to grab you from civilian custody, it absolutely does not preclude civilian indictment and prosecution. They could even try you in absentia. The military absolutely cannot prevent you from getting in legal trouble, even if they remove you physically from custody and the local jurisdiction. You might get away physically, but would still be a fugitive if the locals decided to continue legal proceedings.

As for choosing to indict you or not, that is always at the DA's discretion. They can indict you, or bring a grand jury to indict you for thosecharges which require a grand jury, on a complaint from any citizen, any police officer, or of their own initiative. If the DA chooses not to indict you, there is not much anyone else can do about it either. Police can't do it, judges can't do it, citizens can't do it, nor can city or state executives such as mayors, governor,s city councils or other state officials like legislators. The most that can be done (as far as I know)is the DA can be directed to do it by the state attorney general, and they still may choose not to do it. I'm sure they could be fired for it, but unless and until someone in that position chooses to indict you, you go free.

Alot of crimes go unindicted in one venue or another because of agreements to cede jurisdiction, some formal, some impromptu. But there is nothing that says the federal government in any way, even the military in matters of national security can prevent a local jurisdiction from charging and trying a military member for a crime. Even an exemption to a local statute would have to be codified in federal law before the incident occured.

This discussion is of course theoretical. In any real world scenario, there is a complex mix of political and financial pressure combined with natural laziness, self-interest, altruism, public outrage, patriotism, common sense, obscure law, jury tricks, evidentiary exclusions, malfeasance, perjury, bribery, and confusion.