• 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.

LEO gave me a ticket...

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
Very good and quick summary, thank you.

All that being said, for those who don't want to take the time to read back, we are starting a collection for Josh's appeal at this thread...
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?86699-Please-help-upport-Josh-s-case

Those of you who feel disgusted about the outcome of this case, please consider donating.

Allowing this conviction of "contempt of cop" to stand could very well effect every one of us by influencing and emboldening the future decisions of both LEOs and PAs to arrest and press charges for not following a LEO's request/demand to conceal when ordered.

I don't know about all of you, but allowing Washington to become an "OC at LE discretion" state, is not ok with me.
 

thetrees

New member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
3
Location
washington
Have any of you with such strongly held opinions about how every professional involved in this case; the police, the Judge, the prosecutor, the defense atty, the jury of gun owners, and apparently the local paper (who made a huge deal out of Kirby but said very little about Watson) were undertrained, idiotic, overzealous and such, but the seemingly naive (Sorry warolla, but some of your posts suggest you're new to this) college kid did nothing wrong - ever read the police reports or trial transcripts on this case?

Maybe some of you have an inside track to the details and are comfortable with the characterizations, but I have to believe Kirby and Watson aren't the only open carriers in Vancouver, but they're the ones being convicted. (Sorry, Kirb, not exactly sure of how yours ended but it didn't sound good.) I'd just like to be sure of my target before I start pulling the trigger.

If those of you who've already squeezed a few rounds off know something about the prosecution's version of events, share with the rest of us.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Have any of you with such strongly held opinions about how every professional involved in this case; the police, the Judge, the prosecutor, the defense atty, the jury of gun owners, and apparently the local paper (who made a huge deal out of Kirby but said very little about Watson) were undertrained, idiotic, overzealous and such, but the seemingly naive (Sorry warolla, but some of your posts suggest you're new to this) college kid did nothing wrong - ever read the police reports or trial transcripts on this case?

Maybe some of you have an inside track to the details and are comfortable with the characterizations, but I have to believe Kirby and Watson aren't the only open carriers in Vancouver, but they're the ones being convicted. (Sorry, Kirb, not exactly sure of how yours ended but it didn't sound good.) I'd just like to be sure of my target before I start pulling the trigger.

If those of you who've already squeezed a few rounds off know something about the prosecution's version of events, share with the rest of us.

2nd post....Welcome to OCDO!

What have you done? It is easy for you to sit there and criticize, buy what have you done?

I am intimately familiar with the Kirby case and Kirby did nothing wrong. I am very familiar with the Watson case and believe that Watson will be overturned on appeal.

Yes, there are a fair amount that OC in Vancouver, myself included from time to time. I will continue to do so as I have belief that it is legal and there will be no issues.

Again, what have you done? Have you read the transcripts? Have you talked with either Kirby or Watson? Have you OC'd in Vancouver? Have you spoken with the VPD?
 

w07rolla

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
157
Location
Cheney/Camas, Washington, USA
Have any of you with such strongly held opinions about how every professional involved in this case; the police, the Judge, the prosecutor, the defense atty, the jury of gun owners, and apparently the local paper (who made a huge deal out of Kirby but said very little about Watson) were undertrained, idiotic, overzealous and such, but the seemingly naive (Sorry warolla, but some of your posts suggest you're new to this) college kid did nothing wrong - ever read the police reports or trial transcripts on this case?

Maybe some of you have an inside track to the details and are comfortable with the characterizations, but I have to believe Kirby and Watson aren't the only open carriers in Vancouver, but they're the ones being convicted. (Sorry, Kirb, not exactly sure of how yours ended but it didn't sound good.) I'd just like to be sure of my target before I start pulling the trigger.

If those of you who've already squeezed a few rounds off know something about the prosecution's version of events, share with the rest of us.

My posts suggest Im new to what, OC? Yeah you are right, I am only 24, so 3 years, yeah I am relatively new to OC (Compared to my Grandpa). Does that mean that I dont understand the OC laws? No.

Yeah I am in college, you would probably know this if you read these posts and didnt just jump on here calling sh!t out. "college kid did nothing wrong - ever read the police reports or trial transcripts on this case?" We are all allowed our own opinion - just have some evidence to back it...

2nd post....Welcome to OCDO!

What have you done? It is easy for you to sit there and criticize, buy what have you done?

I am intimately familiar with the Kirby case and Kirby did nothing wrong. I am very familiar with the Watson case and believe that Watson will be overturned on appeal.

Yes, there are a fair amount that OC in Vancouver, myself included from time to time. I will continue to do so as I have belief that it is legal and there will be no issues.

Again, what have you done? Have you read the transcripts? Have you talked with either Kirby or Watson? Have you OC'd in Vancouver? Have you spoken with the VPD?

Thanks...some people are just ignorant.
 
Last edited:

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
My posts suggest Im new to what, OC? Yeah you are right, I am only 24, so 3 years, yeah I am relatively new to OC (Compared to my Grandpa). Does that mean that I dont understand the OC laws? No.

Yeah I am in college, you would probably know this if you read these posts and didnt just jump on here calling sh!t out. "college kid did nothing wrong - ever read the police reports or trial transcripts on this case?" We are all allowed our own opinion - just have some evidence to back it...

Thanks...some people are just ignorant.

Lets recall here a little bit, correct me if I am wrong, you were in an empty parking lot, late at night while snowing outside a business close to closing time and open carrying. Yet still today you have not expressed why you were there to begin with or why you were waiting outside instead of proceeding into the restaurant to wait for others or order your meal.

This in itself could pose an argument as in Spencer, as circumstances surrounding ones actions when combined rose to the level of alarm.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Lets recall here a little bit, correct me if I am wrong, you were in an empty parking lot, late at night while snowing outside a business close to closing time and open carrying. Yet still today you have not expressed why you were there to begin with or why you were waiting outside instead of proceeding into the restaurant to wait for others or order your meal.

This in itself could pose an argument as in Spencer, as circumstances surrounding ones actions when combined rose to the level of alarm.

Dave, first I want to concur but expand on your thoughts a bit....

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

While the description in this case does consider the manner and circumstances and time and place we can not get to the complete conjunctive phrase (1). Watson did not manifest and intent to intimidate nor did he warrant alarm for the safety of other persons.

Spencer allowed the lawful carry of a holstered handgun. Spencer specifically directs that carrying a pejoritive 'assualt weapon' (AK-47) in an 'assaultive manner' (i.e. at the ready with loaded magazine in the receiver), with his head down and at a time and place that qualified for the complete conjuctive phrase in .270. No where in Spencer did the handgun quailify for violating .270.

Now with that being said... I will agree with BigDave, why would someone 'loiter' in incliment weather with an exposed handgun? Today, it is raining/snowing and I put on my coat and my firearm is covered. Did Watson not have a CPL at the time of this incident? Why the attitude towards the police when asked to conceal the firearm?
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
Lets recall here a little bit, correct me if I am wrong, you were in an empty parking lot, late at night while snowing outside a business close to closing time and open carrying. Yet still today you have not expressed why you were there to begin with or why you were waiting outside instead of proceeding into the restaurant to wait for others or order your meal.

This in itself could pose an argument as in Spencer, as circumstances surrounding ones actions when combined rose to the level of alarm.


You are totally right.

People should be forced by law to wear a silk screened T-shirt that announces their 'intentions.'

8:00am and headed to work, wear your "I'm waiting for the bus." shirt.

12:00pm and headed to McDonalds, wear your "I'm going to lunch" shirt.

3:00pm and going to by office supplies, wear your "I'm going shopping" shirt.

10:00pm and waiting in a parking lot, wear your "I'm waiting for my GF to get off work" shirt.

11:00pm and walking down the sidewalk, wear your "I'm exercising" shirt.

You are so right Dave. Everyone should always know what you are doing,,, or they they don't have a legitimate reason to 'be alarmed.' Because simple being present is horribly alarm inducing in others, unless they know exactly what you are doing.

It will suck to change shirts 5 times a day, and carry them all in a backpack, but it's all for the children... err, I mean to stop police harassment.

;)
 
Last edited:

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
Dave, first I want to concur but expand on your thoughts a bit....

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

While the description in this case does consider the manner and circumstances and time and place we can not get to the complete conjunctive phrase (1). Watson did not manifest and intent to intimidate nor did he warrant alarm for the safety of other persons.

Spencer allowed the lawful carry of a holstered handgun. Spencer specifically directs that carrying a pejoritive 'assualt weapon' (AK-47) in an 'assaultive manner' (i.e. at the ready with loaded magazine in the receiver), with his head down and at a time and place that qualified for the complete conjuctive phrase in .270. No where in Spencer did the handgun quailify for violating .270.

Now with that being said... I will agree with BigDave, why would someone 'loiter' in incliment weather with an exposed handgun? Today, it is raining/snowing and I put on my coat and my firearm is covered. Did Watson not have a CPL at the time of this incident? Why the attitude towards the police when asked to conceal the firearm?

As I see it here, this incident places circumstances into a gray area that will have to run the course of the courts.
In 270 it can be viewed, that a person carrying in open, thus display of a firearm during the hours of darkness in an empty parking lot in inclement weather outside a business that was robbed just a couple days before.
As with defending yourself in court it is what you knew at that point in time, well this also applies to the employees and law enforcement when responding as well, let us not forget everything does not evolve around us.

As for Spencer, yes it directly deals with an AK-47 as the weapon of threat, but let us not over look the issue the handgun was concealed and was not displayed.
In this in the manner he was acting, where along with the time of day or night in this case if one was acting in an upset manner with an open carry side arm in the same circumstances could raise the level of alarm to violate 270.

Both or even one of these cases could do some good but on the other hand could do more damage then anyone of us would want.
This is why in the latest wins in SCOTUS where the plaintiffs where hand picked and planned out ahead of time, none where happenstance as these two were.
Thus it does cause concern and should so along with those who donate.

I wishes are for you and Drew to come out ahead by all means, keep your eyes wide open.
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
You are totally right.
People should be forced by law to wear a silk screened T-shirt that announces their 'intentions.'
8:00am and headed to work, wear your "I'm waiting for the bus." shirt.
12:00pm and headed to McDonalds, wear your "I'm going to lunch" shirt.
3:00pm and going to by office supplies, wear your "I'm going shopping" shirt.
10:00pm and waiting in a parking lot, wear your "I'm waiting for my GF to get off work" shirt.
11:00pm and walking down the sidewalk, wear your "I'm exercising" shirt.
You are so right Dave. Everyone should always know what you are doing,,, or they they don't have a legitimate reason to 'be alarmed.' Because simple being present is horribly alarm inducing in others, unless they know exactly what you are doing.
It will suck to change shirts 5 times a day, and carry them all in a backpack, but it's all for the children... err, I mean to stop police harassment.;)

I expected nothing less from you Dave, :lol::lol::lol:
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
I expected nothing less from you Dave, :lol::lol::lol:

That's ok BigDave, I always expect your "blame the victim" mentality.

Damn that Kirby for daring to OC after dark, in a parking lot, near a store. WTF was he thinking? He might as well DARED the cops to arrest him!

;)
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
That's ok BigDave, I always expect your "blame the victim" mentality.
Damn that Kirby for daring to OC after dark, in a parking lot, near a store. WTF was he thinking? He might as well DARED the cops to arrest him!
;)

Not surprising you are quoting the wrong person, lol this thread is not about the Kirby incident as you stated at night time.
Kirby and his wife were at the mall during the day when cited.
:eek:

Psst this is about Josh's incident! I won't tell if you don't roflmao
 
Last edited:

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Not surprising you are quoting the wrong person, lol this thread is not about the Kirby incident as you stated at night time.
Kirby and his wife were at the mall during the day when cited.
:eek:

Psst this is about Josh's incident! I won't tell if you don't roflmao

Partial credit. Kirby was at Albertsons (sort of a strip mall, but not really).
 

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
Not surprising you are quoting the wrong person, lol this thread is not about the Kirby incident as you stated at night time.
Kirby and his wife were at the mall during the day when cited.
:eek:

Psst this is about Josh's incident! I won't tell if you don't roflmao

Hold the phone. Are you saying you never either blatantly blamed Kirby, for getting arrested, or insinuated that it was his fault?

Hell, I can pick almost ANY incident where an OCer was harassed by LEO or arrested, and find posts where you tried to assign at least partial blame to the OCer.

Just look at the recent banking thread, where you mocked the OP for trying to get a branch manager to follow CORPORATE POLICY.

Yeah, what an idiot. Trying to get a company to you know, follow their own policy.

BigDave said:
Yeah! way to tell them, shove it in their face, by all means do not comply and address the issue, by all rights we are talking about our rights!
Yeah next time they see an open carrier they will not think twice about what they are about!
Way to go :banghead:

Yeah, that fool. That pie in the sky fool for thinking a manager should follow their company's own policy.

But then, that's what I expect from you. Always the cop-apologist. Always blaming the OCer for doing something wrong (wrong being defined as something you disagree with).
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Unfortunately with friends like some of these statist posters who needs enemies?
Just like Josh's pro NRA jury.

It is none of our business what Kirby or Josh or anybody were doing as long as they weren't hurting anybody while doing it, the fact they carry a gun is supposed to be inconsequential. And as Nick pointed out the law specifically states certain actions on the part of the gun carrier, not how people felt.
 
Last edited:

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
Yes we can see, here is two that cannot stay on topic and want to twist things around so they can spew their hate in their own little twisted manner.
Get on topic boys:lol:

SVG for someone that says he blocks my post you sure respond to them enough :eek: Oh but nobody notices do they :lol:
 
Last edited:

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
well,,,

several times throughout this thread,
people point out that the business Josh was in front of,
had recently been robbed!
seemingly to make Joshs actions more damning.
Josh had no way of knowing this past history,
it should not, and does not have any bearing in regards to applying 9.41.270!

And another thing, Nobody was alarmed by Joshs presents until,
the Cops entered the business and announced that,
their is a Man With A Gun outside!!!!
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
several times throughout this thread,
people point out that the business Josh was in front of,
had recently been robbed!
seemingly to make Joshs actions more damning.
Josh had no way of knowing this past history,
it should not, and does not have any bearing in regards to applying 9.41.270!

And another thing, Nobody was alarmed by Joshs presents until,
the Cops entered the business and announced that,
their is a Man With A Gun outside!!!!

Josh's actions were not more damming do to previous events he had no knowledge, but is a factor for RAS to make contact and well with what he was doing, time of night, weather and if there were other actions that played into it.
It seems some feel unless they have all the information concerning RAS the Police have no right to make contact and this is not true.

I am not condoning police actions afterwards but I feel Josh or others here would donate to the conflict instead of choosing another route to accomplish the tasked at hand.

Then it comes down to something that should not matter but yet it can and does everyday, especially when it comes to juries and perception is a major factor, like it or not.

Still the question of why being there is not answered and I really do not expect to get the answer here in an open forum.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
several times throughout this thread,
people point out that the business Josh was in front of,
had recently been robbed!
seemingly to make Joshs actions more damning.
Josh had no way of knowing this past history,
it should not, and does not have any bearing in regards to applying 9.41.270!

And another thing, Nobody was alarmed by Joshs presents until,
the Cops entered the business and announced that,
their is a Man With A Gun outside!!!!

Of course they had to go create a crisis.
 

thetrees

New member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
3
Location
washington
Sorry, Josh, if it appeared I was pointing the finger, I was just trying to get more info. The main reason I follow this forum is for the detailed information and dialogue. I appreciate the question of "What have you done?" and it goes to what I'm saying. I don't think it's appropriate to complain about a situation or make strong statements about the intentions of the parties unless you have some specific knowledge of what really happened. It sounded like some people might have had that info. I don't have the access, beyond the net, to seek out the details. (This case has been taking so long, my impatience to know the truth may have created unintended inflection in my characterization of the OP.)

Big Dave kind of alluded to what I'm curious about. The weather, time, place, circumstances regarding the prior robbery are factors but we, most of whom I suspect are not LE, lawyers or judges, all seem to agree are insufficient in themselves. I'm nobody special and I just have a hard time thinking all the cops, lawyers, judges and jury members, who do have the details, could all be dumber than me.

Here we have only one limited (and for good reason in a public forum) side of the story. To analyze how this happened, and avoid precedent setting incidents that intrude on the rights of all of us, it'd be nice to know what other factors about this contact were considered.

BTW, I appreciate the welcome. I don't post much, but I do follow often and appreciate the education.
 
Top