Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 80

Thread: New Washington State Supreme Court Decision: Unlawful Terry Stop

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Regular Member Shy_Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Spokane / Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    All I could find was the Feb 18, 2008 opinion. Was there a new one that I am missing?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Sorry, My link must not go straight to it for you huh?

    Docket Number: 79992-0
    Title of Case: State v. Gatewood
    File Date: 05/01/2008
    Oral Argument Date: 03/13/2008

  4. #4
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    Strange, one time I click the link I get the whole appeal site, the next I got just the case in question.

    http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/?f...name=799920MAJ

  5. #5
    Regular Member Shy_Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Spokane / Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    Although I don't like the fact that he did have drugs and an illegal firearm, I do like the fact that the court was able to uphold the rights of an individual citizen and further clarify the requirements of a lawful terry stop.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Shy_Panda wrote:
    Although I don't like the fact that he did have drugs and an illegal firearm, I do like the fact that the court was able to uphold the rights of an individual citizen and further clarify the requirements of a lawful terry stop.
    +1

  7. #7
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    Here's the opinion.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    this is interesting. I'll have to check lexis for more relevant documents to this kind of thing, it could build a pretty solid case for anyone who is "harassed" by the cops.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    rysa wrote:
    this is interesting. I'll have to check lexis for more relevant documents to this kind of thing, it could build a pretty solid case for anyone who is "harassed" by the cops.
    There's several more in this thread. I just added another a couple days ago.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    I read those, they're all good. I think a repository of case law is something good to have. I'll check shepards and see if its still good; though im sure it all is.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    Shy_Panda wrote:
    Although I don't like the fact that he did have drugs and an illegal firearm, I do like the fact that the court was able to uphold the rights of an individual citizen and further clarify the requirements of a lawful terry stop.
    There's nothing about it I don't like, honestly. Felon = gun ban for life is ridiculous, and our "war on drugs" has cost far more money and lives than it's ever saved in my opinion.

    I'm not a big fan of malum prohibitum in general. If we spent our enforcement energies and monies on malum in se (the real reason for "ignorance of the law is no excuse"), we'd be a much happier, freer and less incarcerated people.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    For a minute I thought it was a SCOTUS ruling. I edited the title to "Washington State Supreme Court...".

  13. #13
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    For a minute I thought it was a SCOTUS ruling. I edited the title to "Washington State Supreme Court...".
    The one in that other Washington is the United States Supreme Court. :P

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    bobernet wrote:
    Shy_Panda wrote:
    Although I don't like the fact that he did have drugs and an illegal firearm, I do like the fact that the court was able to uphold the rights of an individual citizen and further clarify the requirements of a lawful terry stop.
    There's nothing about it I don't like, honestly. Felon = gun ban for life is ridiculous, and our "war on drugs" has cost far more money and lives than it's ever saved in my opinion.

    I'm not a big fan of malum prohibitum in general. If we spent our enforcement energies and monies on malum in se (the real reason for "ignorance of the law is no excuse"), we'd be a much happier, freer and less incarcerated people.

    Citizenship is something that is valuable (at least to some of us who have seen what it can cost. Mybe everyone should have to serve to earn the right to be a citizen. See Starship Troopers for and examole)and those that don't value it should loose it, you know like felons and others to stupid to appreciate it. The reason the war on drugs doesn't work is because of people with your attitude. We need to get tough about it, instead of half measures that people like you advocate.


  15. #15
    Regular Member Shy_Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Spokane / Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    China has been winning the war on drugs... they have some pretty strict rules, for example if you are caught with drugs and can be considered a dealer then they just sort of put you to death, rarely with a trial. I am obviously not advocating this in a country as great as ours, but they are able to win the war. Personally I think that drugs should be legalized and taxed like nobodys business but until that point they are illegal and should carry with them stiff penalties. I say all of this having never taken drugs other than what I was given by doctors and the occasional beer. I am of the mindset that everyone, including the government should stay out of my life and I will stay out of everyone else's lives.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Citizenship is something that is valuable (at least to some of us who have seen what it can cost. Mybe everyone should have to serve to earn the right to be a citizen. See Starship Troopers for and examole)and those that don't value it should loose it, you know like felons and others to stupid to appreciate it. The reason the war on drugs doesn't work is because of people with your attitude. We need to get tough about it, instead of half measures that people like you advocate.
    Hmmm... In many states, carrying a concealed weapon without a permit is a felony. So, if you're open carrying and the wind blows your shirt over your gun momentarily... you deserve to have your citizenship revoked?

    The reason the "war on drugs" doesn't work is the same reason prohibition didn't work.

    P.S. I don't advocate half-measures, I advocate *no* measures. Just like I don't avocate a "war on alcohol" a "war on tobacco" a "war on trans fats" or a "war on people who want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet."

    Before you spew your snide tone, consider that you don't know anything about the service history (or otherwise) of those you deride on the Internet. I did serve - in wartime. Although, unlike you, I don't consider military service to make me any more qualified to have an opinion than those you accuse of being "to [sic] stupid" to appreciate their citizenship or really, "non-felon status" since no one was discussing citizenship until your post.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    SNIP Citizenship is something that is valuable (at least to some of us who have seen what it can cost. Mybe everyone should have to serve to earn the right to be a citizen. See Starship Troopers for and examole)and those that don't value it should loose it, you know like felons and others to stupid to appreciate it.
    Thanks, Bear! You jogged something for me!

    I got to thinking, would "valuing citizenship" really do us any good? I thought not. We'd still end up with the looney left, the neo-cons, the greedy,the ambitious being able to vote.

    I wondered if earned or valued citizenship was the right standard to apply. Which one would be?Wait a minute. We already know that answer.The Founders gave people the right to vote, that is they used a form of democracy, for exactly only one reason: to avoid tyranny.

    Then it hit me!

    "IT IS THE FIRST DUTY OF EVERY VOTER TO WATCH CAREFULLY AND GUARD AGAINST TYRANNY."

    This isn't some inspirational thought to be trotted out on the 4th of July. It isn't just a good idea. It isn't just a matter of some people trust government and somemistrust government according to personal opinionand subject to debate as to which opinion is better. Its at the very foundations of our government.

    Citizenship--the franchise--would need, no, it MUST hinge on the willingnessto guardagainst tyranny.

    Every voter who pulls a lever without having examined for tyranny is violating the very reason they were given a vote.
    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.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    bobernet wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Citizenship is something that is valuable (at least to some of us who have seen what it can cost. Mybe everyone should have to serve to earn the right to be a citizen. See Starship Troopers for and examole)and those that don't value it should loose it, you know like felons and others to stupid to appreciate it. The reason the war on drugs doesn't work is because of people with your attitude. We need to get tough about it, instead of half measures that people like you advocate.
    Hmmm... In many states, carrying a concealed weapon without a permit is a felony. So, if you're open carrying and the wind blows your shirt over your gun momentarily... you deserve to have your citizenship revoked?

    The reason the "war on drugs" doesn't work is the same reason prohibition didn't work.

    P.S. I don't advocate half-measures, I advocate *no* measures. Just like I don't avocate a "war on alcohol" a "war on tobacco" a "war on trans fats" or a "war on people who want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet."

    Before you spew your snide tone, consider that you don't know anything about the service history (or otherwise) of those you deride on the Internet. I did serve - in wartime. Although, unlike you, I don't consider military service to make me any more qualified to have an opinion than those you accuse of being "to [sic] stupid" to appreciate their citizenship or really, "non-felon status" since no one was discussing citizenship until your post.
    If you are stupid enough to wear a shirt that can blow over your open carried weapon, then are are too stupid to be open carrying. Good God, don't make excuse for felons and stupid people. You sure don't act like you value your citizenship. You sound like it is just fine if the Congress gives it to anyone, felons and illegals alike. Not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle is like not wearing a helmet in a race car during a race, very, very stupid. Usually those without helmets are those without any provisions to care for them when they become vegetables, so the public ends up picking up the tab, not my idea of a responsible person. The loss of gun rights is because you lost your citizenship and you brought up the loss of gun rights. You can't vote or have any other of those privileges of citizenship, gun rights included.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    "Not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle is like not wearing a helmet in a race car during a race, very, very stupid."

    No its not, and its none of your business in the first place. Do I tell you what kind of hearing protection you have to wear while shooting, or what kind of eye protection to wear while running your saw?

    That's the problem with this state, too many people want to be my mommy. I'll decide when I take a risk, and you decide for yourself please.







  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    tjschul wrote:
    "Not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle is like not wearing a helmet in a race car during a race, very, very stupid."

    No its not, and its none of your business in the first place. Do I tell you what kind of hearing protection you have to wear while shooting, or what kind of eye protection to wear while running your saw?

    That's the problem with this state, too many people want to be my mommy. I'll decide when I take a risk, and you decide for yourself please.





    What little you know aboutmotorcycle accidentsis show by your statement. Try being and EMT responding to accidents, bike accidents ar the worst. I would be dead withouthelmets, 3 times. Once in a race car, once in a race boat and once on a motorcycle after 30 years of riding without a major accident.So yeah, a helmet on a bike is smart. The Docscan fix almost every part of you except your smashed head. The trouble with you is you want to be irresponsible.


  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    <snip>.. Usually those without helmets are those without any provisions to care for them when they become vegetables, so the public ends up picking up the tab, not my idea of a responsible person. <snip>
    And therein lies the root of the problem.

    Gov't has delared that 'we the people' must shoulder the burden of resposibility for those who will not do so themselves. Where the *&#!@ do they get off telling me that I HAVE to pay to care for some putz who scrambled his brains by not wearing a helmet?

    IT'S NOT THEIR PLACE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. It's not the government's responsibility.

    The very fact that people know that gummint will take care of them enables the stupid people of the world to make stupid decisions without repercussions. If you wanna stop a vast majority of stupid decisions, MAKE them accept the consequences.....STOP ENABLING THEM.

    Last I checked we still live in 'The Land of the Free' (or so they claim). Let the weak willed fry their brains with drugs. Let the idiots of the world drive without a seatbelt and impale themselves on a steering column. Let the stupid people ride bikes without a helmet and spread their brains across half the county.
    But do not DEIGN to tell ME that *I* have to shoulder the burden of THEIR decisions!

    I say the world would be a better place without em!




  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Phssthpok wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    <snip>.. Usually those without helmets are those without any provisions to care for them when they become vegetables, so the public ends up picking up the tab, not my idea of a responsible person. <snip>
    And therein lies the root of the problem.

    Gov't has delared that 'we the people' must shoulder the burden of resposibility for those who will not do so themselves. Where the *&#!@ do they get off telling me that I HAVE to pay to care for some putz who scrambled his brains by not wearing a helmet?

    IT'S NOT THEIR PLACE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. It's not the government's responsibility.

    The very fact that people know that gummint will take care of them enables the stupid people of the world to make stupid decisions without repercussions. If you wanna stop a vast majority of stupid decisions, MAKE them accept the consequences.....STOP ENABLING THEM.

    Last I checked we still live in 'The Land of the Free' (or so they claim). Let the weak willed fry their brains with drugs. Let the idiots of the world drive without a seatbelt and impale themselves on a steering column. Let the stupid people ride bikes without a helmet and spread their brains across half the county.
    But do not DEIGN to tell ME that *I* have to shoulder the burden of THEIR decisions!

    I say the world would be a better place without em!



    Like I've said for years, the present US government is more restrictive and taxes more than the English government the Founding Fathersrebelled against. The time for the revolution to start is long past. The problem is that this country is full of people who want the government to take care of them. Maybe this economic depression we are going into will make people realize you can't give up your rights to the government because all governments are corrupt.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    I rock climb, sometimes without helmet, I ride bikes sometimes without ahelmet, and I drive cars sometimes without a government mandated seatbelt or, oh-my-god an airbag.Sometimes I even shoot a gun with out ear and eye protection!

    I'll decide what risk I take, and ask you mommies to mind your own kids, and stay out of my business! My risk..my consequences.

    God its tough gettin old and remembering what America was like!








  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    tjschul wrote:
    I rock climb, sometimes without helmet, I ride bikes sometimes without ahelmet, and I drive cars sometimes without a government mandated seatbelt or, oh-my-god an airbag.Sometimes I even shoot a gun with out ear and eye protection!

    I'll decide what risk I take, and ask you mommies to mind your own kids, and stay out of my business! My risk..my consequences.

    God its tough gettin old and remembering what America was like!






    The trouble is the world you want is at least 50 years in the past. The trouble is big brother doesn't see it your way and I still end up paying if you screw up.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    Not Really Bear, It 's still like I want it, I may have to pay a ticket or something now and then but its still America...land of the free. I just wish everyone would quit trying to mother adults ("war" on drugs). You see I don't have to take your kindly suggestions to do all the good little things you, or the damn (current) liberal govt wants me to, to "be safe". Hope you can sleep tonight.

    Oh yeah, I carry my own insurance policies, and don't care if you do or not..



Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •