Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: City of Puyallup

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282

    Post imported post

    Got this back from the city

    One of our city attorneys has researched your question and has the following response: The Puyallup Police Department confirms that it will not arrest or cite someone for mere open possession of a firearm in Puyallup's parks or cemetery.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    jddssc121 wrote:
    Got this back from the city

    One of our city attorneys has researched your question and has the following response: The Puyallup Police Department confirms that it will not arrest or cite someone for mere open possession of a firearm in Puyallup's parks or cemetery.
    Well that's a good thing. After all Zombies do start from the the cemetery. :celebrate
    "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

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    ...another example of an incomplete answer, they say they won't arrest for "mere open carry", in the park or cemetary... what about the rest of the city?
    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Bobarino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    this has been brought to their attention several times. i did it at a city council meeting in 2004, the minutes of which are here: http://www.cityofpuyallup.org/files/library/6d9caef8a5f06d92.pdf pages 116 and 117.

    excerpt: "Bobby Williams, read from a handout that he gave Council, regarding
    the Puyallup Municipal Code 9.20.050 Fireworks, firearms, and weapons; and the RCW
    9.41.290 State preemption. “The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and
    preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state. Such
    laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I,
    Section 24 of the state constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others; restricting the
    possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town,
    county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to: Any pistol
    in the possession of a person licensed under RCW or exempt from the licensing
    requirement of the RCW.” He explained that the state ruling overrides the municipal
    code and asked Council to repeal that portion of the PMC addressing this issue.
    "

    they have taken no action at all to remove this ordinance.

    Puyallup PD also has a track record of harassing open carriers.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_to...uyallup+police

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_to...uyallup+police

    Bobby

    edit: Jarhead, what ever happened with your case?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    bugly wrote:
    ...another example of an incomplete answer, they say they won't arrest for "mere open carry", in the park or cemetary... what about the rest of the city?
    Not an incomplete answer but rather a post without the question. I believe the question was involving a municipal code that attempts to restrict carrying a firearm in city parks or in cemeteries within the city. If they will not arrest or cite for breaking a municipal code then they more than likely won't at all unless it is in violation of state 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

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282

    Post imported post

    bugly wrote:
    ...another example of an incomplete answer, they say they won't arrest for "mere open carry", in the park or cemetary... what about the rest of the city?
    not an incomplete answer. I had emailed them asking about those two places as their code was incorrect

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    One of our city attorneys has researched your question and has the following response: The Puyallup Police Department confirms that it will not arrest or cite someone for mere open possession of a firearm in Puyallup's parks or cemetery.


    So the next natural question is: Will they use the trespass law to eject open carriers from parks/cemeteries?

    The issue of trespassing people from public property is not settled law, thus the police are free to leverage the uncertainty to solve the "problem" on the street.

  8. #8
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    One of our city attorneys has researched your question and has the following response: The Puyallup Police Department confirms that it will not arrest or cite someone for mere open possession of a firearm in Puyallup's parks or cemetery.


    So the next natural question is: Will they use the trespass law to eject open carriers from parks/cemeteries?

    The issue of trespassing people from public property is not settled law, thus the police are free to leverage the uncertainty to solve the "problem" on the street.
    Deanf, I think you may make a valid point. The only way you can be trespassed from city property (as far as I'm aware in my non-attorney knowledge) is by violating a law or lawful rule/regulation. Since this isn't a lawful rule or regulation, then you shouldn't be under fear of trespass, but an LEO certainly could cite the city's law to trespass you and they haven't technically cited you for "mere open possession of a firearm", but instead cited you with trespass for violating the illegal rule/regulation and now, if you don't leave, I would imagine you'd be violating the (though, in my opinion, illegal and unenforcable) trespass notice and might face arrest.

    Certainly something to bring up to whomever it was that responded to that... make sure you point out that until the wording is changed, there is still potential for abuse and misconception from the public. Also, it could unnecessarily increase 911 calls regarding a man with a gun when they see that the sign says no firearms allowed.
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282

    Post imported post

    I already wrote back asking for a training memo to PD, logged a request with the city to changes the codes, and also asked about the trespass nonsense

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    just_a_car wrote:
    deanf wrote:
    One of our city attorneys has researched your question and has the following response: The Puyallup Police Department confirms that it will not arrest or cite someone for mere open possession of a firearm in Puyallup's parks or cemetery.


    So the next natural question is: Will they use the trespass law to eject open carriers from parks/cemeteries?

    The issue of trespassing people from public property is not settled law, thus the police are free to leverage the uncertainty to solve the "problem" on the street.
    Deanf, I think you may make a valid point. The only way you can be trespassed from city property (as far as I'm aware in my non-attorney knowledge) is by violating a law or lawful rule/regulation. Since this isn't a lawful rule or regulation, then you shouldn't be under fear of trespass, but an LEO certainly could cite the city's law to trespass you and they haven't technically cited you for "mere open possession of a firearm", but instead cited you with trespass for violating the illegal rule/regulation and now, if you don't leave, I would imagine you'd be violating the (though, in my opinion, illegal and unenforcable) trespass notice and might face arrest.

    Certainly something to bring up to whomever it was that responded to that... make sure you point out that until the wording is changed, there is still potential for abuse and misconception from the public. Also, it could unnecessarily increase 911 calls regarding a man with a gun when they see that the sign says no firearms allowed.

    *Ahem*....*cough*

  11. #11
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    Phssthpok wrote:
    just_a_car wrote:
    Deanf, I think you may make a valid point. The only way you can be trespassed from city property (as far as I'm aware in my non-attorney knowledge) is by violating a law or lawful rule/regulation. Since this isn't a lawful rule or regulation, then you shouldn't be under fear of trespass, but an LEO certainly could cite the city's law to trespass you and they haven't technically cited you for "mere open possession of a firearm", but instead cited you with trespass for violating the illegal rule/regulation and now, if you don't leave, I would imagine you'd be violating the (though, in my opinion, illegal and unenforcable) trespass notice and might face arrest.

    Certainly something to bring up to whomever it was that responded to that... make sure you point out that until the wording is changed, there is still potential for abuse and misconception from the public. Also, it could unnecessarily increase 911 calls regarding a man with a gun when they see that the sign says no firearms allowed.
    *Ahem*....*cough*
    I didn't say the officer wouldn't be breaking the law, I just said you might face arrest.
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

Posting Permissions

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