Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Spokane Training Bulletin...

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

    Post imported post

    Well, after addressing city council and providing them, the Chief of Police, and the city attorney with copies of State vs. Casad, and all of the training bulletins issued in WA, I decided it was about time to call the Chief and set up an appointment to discuss the issue yesterday.

    Her secretary asked me what it was in regards to and I told her "a training directive to inform the officers about the legality of OC", and she said, "It has already been done".

    :shock:Shock and awe in my head right now. So I asked her, "Could you forward me a copy?" and she said sure......

    So today I got this....


    Hi Jason,

    Apparently, I was mistaken about the training bulletin. It has been crafted and is waiting for approval from city legal. I will send it to you once it is released.

    Thank you.


    Carla Stamatoplos

    Administrative Secretary/Chief Kirkpatrick
    Spokane Police Department



    So this is good news, as long as she follows through and it has really been addressed finally. I sent a nice letter back to her and so now I will just have to keep on her gently about it.

    But.....between this AND the changes to the Spokane Municipal Code regarding "Emergency Orders" that Fetch has spearheaded, we (I really hope) may be looking at a serious victory on two fronts over here in Spokane.:celebrateI am pretty excited by this communication from the department, but I wont get my hopes up too much. I'll believe it when I see it.

    Now if we can just get the ranges and gun clubs in line......

    ETA: Please everybody, don't start emailing her or calling her about it. Let's not be a pain in her ass, otherwise she may be reserved about releasing it to me when it is ready. Let's just let it run it's course. Thanks

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

    Post imported post

    I know it's premature but.... WaHoo!
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,268

    Post imported post

    I have found Kirkpatrick to be a very nice person. She frankly is a very good Chief for here in spokane and has ties into almost everything.

    The fact that this has taken this long is the only surprise she has had for me. This is good news indeed.

  4. #4
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    If I remember correctly, Kirkpatrick used to be the Chief in Federal Way when Lonnie got them to issue a training bulletin on OC.
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    David.Car wrote:
    I have found Kirkpatrick to be a very nice person. She frankly is a very good Chief for here in spokane and has ties into almost everything.

    The fact that this has taken this long is the only surprise she has had for me. This is good news indeed.
    Well, I don't know that anybody has even brought it up to here until about 2-3 months ago.
    I was able to get the same materials to the President of the Police Guild through a friend, but i am not sure if that had any influence or not.

    I believe there was another prominent and well respected member on the forum here who has contacted the department about it, with regards to a specific incident a while back.

    Hopefully it was just a matter of creating enough buzz in a short amount of time to make them want to get it done.

    We will see....

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    I really did not expect too much of a problem from her seeing as she was the original chief to issue a training bulletin out of Federal Way.
    "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

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    SWEET!

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    It did take a LONG time for her to issue, and it probably had to do with her bosses than Federal Way.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Shy_Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Spokane / Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    Looking great, that makes me really happy. I am actually looking forward to getting back to spokane that much more now. great work surf.

  10. #10
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    bump..

    for the new folks

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Update: email sent to her to follow up, she said it is still waiting approval from City legal, but she did not forget about me.

    Tick, tick, tick, tick......

  12. #12
    Regular Member Shy_Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Spokane / Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    Still waiting?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Shy_Panda wrote:
    Still waiting?
    Yep. I wrote her again last week, emphasizing that I am a bit surprised that such an important public safety issue that many officers are confused about has still not been addressed. I also asked for an appointment to speak with the chief about it but apperently she did not want to indulge my request. Her response was limited and as follows:

    "The training bulletin is still at City Legal for review. I checked with our Training Administrator and as soon as City Legal has finalized it, it will be sent out to all police, and available to the public. "

    That was it.
    So I am thinking about addressing city council about it again during open forum, if anybody else would like to join me to speak let me know via PM and we can figure out a good date. There is always somebody at the council meetings from the city legal department so i could address them up front about it, and make my concerns made apparent to the city council, yet again, just in case there are problems down the road.

    Or I could just be patient still and wait it out, but damn, the chief has already done one of these in Federal Way.

    i dunno, what do you guys think?

  14. #14
    Regular Member Shy_Panda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Spokane / Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    Sounds like city legal is draging their feet intentionally. I don't know if it is a good idea to continue pushing the issue through her or through city council. It seems like the issue needs to be addressed with city legal and if that doesn't work revert back to the city council... I am just aprehensive about them due to their general ineffectiveness and all the corruption that surrounds their chamber. I don't know though, I have done relatively little in the way of ensuring that they are aware that OC is legal so it is really your call as to what you want to do. I am back down in pullman so yet again I am of little help up in spokane. If you need something however it is only an hour and a half drive... just keep in mind gas prices for a poor college student.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    302

    Post imported post

    I've got an appointment myself with the Centralia city attorney and police chief tomorrow. After emails and letters and phone calls fell on deaf ears, I came to the same conclusion you did: do it in person.

    I'm fighting a prohibition on carry in city parks. Any suggestions on materials to bring? I plan to have the relevant RCWs, the city code in question, OC pamplets, and police training bulletins. Although this fight doesn't really involve OC, so I'll leave that for another day unless it comes up.

    One thing I really want to do is avoid being drawn in to a discussion on the merits of the law and carrying. This is about obeying state preemption. My opinion and their opinions aren't germane. Here is the law, sir/madam, will you follow it?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Post imported post

    I would remind them that they expect us to be good little boys and girls and follow the LAW. I would expect the same from them.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Trigger Dr wrote:
    I would remind them that they expect us to be good little boys and girls and follow the LAW. I would expect the same from them.
    +1

    State premption is state premption. Tell them you will follow the law, and if they arrest you in violation of state law, then they can resolve it in court with you, unless they just want to fix their errors and be done right then and there

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Spokane, WA, ,
    Posts
    639

    Post imported post

    Trigger Dr wrote:
    I would remind them that they expect us to be good little boys and girls and follow the LAW. I would expect the same from them.
    +1

    State premption is state premption. Tell them you will follow the law, and if they arrest you in violation of state law, then they can resolve it in court with you, unless they just want to fix their errors and be done right then and there

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

    Post imported post

    If you want them to do it quickly, make it sound like it's in their best interest (not your's) to fix this.

    In other words, warn them that having signage like that that's preempted and repealed could result in illegal detainment, arrest and/or citation by an unaware officer and could result in extensive legal costs to the city that could be avoided by simply painting over the preempted and repealed part of the sign and bringing their code in-line with state law.
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    302

    Post imported post

    Success. Mostly.

    They're going to submit a recommendation to fix the law to the city council. The police chief and city attorney weren't thrilled to be having the discussion, but they eventually did agree and were friendly by the time we wrapped it up. I think they were expecting a wacko camo-wearing contrarian gunnie to show up, but what they got was a friendly, prepared, respectful (but firm) young man.

    Unfortunately they were also quite pleased to announce they'd be submitting a plan to ban discharge (we don't currently have an ordinance), even in the rural outlying areas of the city's control. While state law does allow them to do this, I'd like to see if I can convince the city council to vote it down. There are many areas on the outskirts where people can and do shoot without endangering or bothering anyone else.

    So I have my next project.

    Good luck in Spokane!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    t3rmin wrote:
    Success. Mostly.

    They're going to submit a recommendation to fix the law to the city council. The police chief and city attorney weren't thrilled to be having the discussion, but they eventually did agree and were friendly by the time we wrapped it up. I think they were expecting a wacko camo-wearing contrarian gunnie to show up, but what they got was a friendly, prepared, respectful (but firm) young man.

    Unfortunately they were also quite pleased to announce they'd be submitting a plan to ban discharge (we don't currently have an ordinance), even in the rural outlying areas of the city's control. While state law does allow them to do this, I'd like to see if I can convince the city council to vote it down. There are many areas on the outskirts where people can and do shoot without endangering or bothering anyone else.

    So I have my next project.

    Good luck in Spokane!
    What you should do is compromise on this one. Having a law prohibiting the discharge of a firearm is not a bad thing in a city environment, provided they have an exemption in there for self-defense. What you could do is to see if they would be willing to map out discharge prohibited areas and then reference the map in the code. Snohomish county does this for the discharge law.

    Snohomish county code 10.12.010 specifies the no discharge areas and 10.12.020 is the shooting unlawful code. It is a nice compromise if they insist on having a no discharge law.
    "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

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Spokane, Wa., ,
    Posts
    265

    Post imported post

    City codes probably be in a differnt thread, but Spokane does have a "Discharging of Firearm" ordinance, SMC 10.11.050. As approved last year. #4 was put in when the city annexed the property that the Spokane Rifle Club is on.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    302

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote
    What you should do is compromise on this one. Having a law prohibiting the discharge of a firearm is not a bad thing in a city environment, provided they have an exemption in there for self-defense. What you could do is to see if they would be willing to map out discharge prohibited areas and then reference the map in the code. Snohomish county does this for the discharge law.

    Snohomish county code 10.12.010 specifies the no discharge areas and 10.12.020 is the shooting unlawful code. It is a nice compromise if they insist on having a no discharge law.
    Good suggestion, and that end result would be acceptable to me, but I think I still have to oppose it on philosophical grounds. We already have laws for reckless endangerment, disturbing the peace, etc. Why not enforce what's already on the books? I fail to see how yet ANOTHER law will improve things.

    Not to mention they had a discharge law which only fell off the books in the past few years, but the public is still operating under the assumption there is a discharge law. If they're having trouble with it now, while people believe it is illegal, what will be gained by making it actually illegal?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    t3rmin wrote:
    joeroket wrote
    What you should do is compromise on this one. Having a law prohibiting the discharge of a firearm is not a bad thing in a city environment, provided they have an exemption in there for self-defense. What you could do is to see if they would be willing to map out discharge prohibited areas and then reference the map in the code. Snohomish county does this for the discharge law.

    Snohomish county code 10.12.010 specifies the no discharge areas and 10.12.020 is the shooting unlawful code. It is a nice compromise if they insist on having a no discharge law.
    Good suggestion, and that end result would be acceptable to me, but I think I still have to oppose it on philosophical grounds. We already have laws for reckless endangerment, disturbing the peace, etc. Why not enforce what's already on the books? I fail to see how yet ANOTHER law will improve things.

    Not to mention they had a discharge law which only fell off the books in the past few years, but the public is still operating under the assumption there is a discharge law. If they're having trouble with it now, while people believe it is illegal, what will be gained by making it actually illegal?
    I hear ya on having to oppose on philisophical grounds and I too wish they would enforce the laws they have but in this case I fear they will not back down on a no discharge law. Compromising is something that I think they may actually do especially if they think they can control the areas that discharge is allowed.
    "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

Posting Permissions

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