Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: A second-hand experience

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    I just got off the phone with a M/C riding buddy. He went over Hwy 20 to Winthrop yesterday.
    Got pulled over for speeding by a NPS ranger. I didn't even know the NPS rangers had lights! Anyway, he had radar, and pulled him over for speeding.
    While stopped, ranger asked my friend if he was carrying. His reply "Yes" So ranger asks him for pistol and retires to his patrol SUV for 10 minutes.....
    Now we could mince this part to pieces, and some of you might. But if you wanna do that, do me a favor and cut and paste this in another thread, wouldja? My questions aren't whether LEO was in the right. He clearly wasn't, but my buddy isn't an OCer, and wanted out of a cite, so wasn't going to argue.
    Here are the questions:
    1. Has anyone looked to see if there is a corridor encapsulating Hwy 20 to keep it outside the NP? If the road is in the NP, carry there is illegal, at least for the time being. My friend's contention is that Hwy 20 is in the National Rec Area, and not the NP.
    There is some precedant for this as anytime a public road passes thru a wilderness area, a 1/4 mile corridor is provided for the roadway.
    2. Are any of you aware of the NPS rangers being cross-deputized in a county? Or anywhere else for that matter, the county is just the most likely place.
    3. Anyone with experience in a traffic cite from a federal LEO? Where would ya have to go fight it? The federal courthouse?

    So, to end the story, the ranger brings back the pistol, gives my buddy a written warning (for 77 in a 60!) and got whatever info he needed from the pistol, prolly confirming it wasn't listed stolen.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    113

    Post imported post

    I don't know the specific answers to your questions, but I have experienced this before in Stevens county.

    Before I was 21 I lived out on a ranch. And ran horses. We went armed.

    Long story short, I was headed into town one morning, in my Bronco, on Hwy 395 and I had a Ranger in a Chevy Tahoe flashed me over.

    Ranger asked for ID, and what weapons were in the the vehicle. When I asked him why I was being stopped he ordered me out of the car. I locked the doors and grabbed the cell. He then began threatening to break the window, and went to his truck and pulled on a gun belt. All this while I was on with 911.

    Sheriffs showed up. Turns out his 85 year old neighbor up the road reported a red and white 4X4 offroading and shooting on private property the day before.

    In the end he had no authority, to make the stop. Certainly no authority to make threats.

    What hung him at trial was the 911 recording, with his threats that if I didn't get out he'd kill me cause I know you got a gun in there, and his statement on the stand, of "He was just a kid, I thought a little scare would make him confess. I was only looking out for my neighbor" In the end it was a red and white pickup, NOT a Bronco.

    I know you can be stopped in a park, but I don't believe you can be on the hwy, and I believe that the LE powers only extend inside of Park boundries. Although that may have changed in recent years, since I see alot more rangers armed then I did in the past.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    The NPS Ranger had the authority to issue the citation as the National Rec area is within the NPS jurisdiction (its part of the park complex). The Rangers are commissioned law enforcement officers and carry firearms. The park has a "propriety" jurisdiction and Rangers can cite for park violations of which speeding is one. Addtionally, full time rangers,not seasonals are generally cross commissioned with Whatcom county. Your friend was probably cited under the park regulation and will need to go to court in Bellingham at the federal courthouse. The info should be on the citation.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    Oops, I didnt read the whole story, looks like your friend got a written warning and got his gun back so it turned out well. Also, it is a violation to carry a loaded gun in the park area although Highway 20, being inside the park, would probably be exempt if you were just travelling through. There is a difference because oif jurisdiction. In Mt Rainier National park, that is called "exclusive" jusridiction and only federal law applies. The State patrol has no jurisdiction there. Some parks, like Lake Roosevelt are "concurrent" jurisdiction and both state and federal laws apply. I can be confusing. And yes, I used to be an NPS Ranger but that was years ago and things may have changed somewhat.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    should read it can be confusing, not I can be confusing:shock:

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    triehl27,

    What was this ranger a ranger for?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    Weave wrote:
    Oops, I didnt read the whole story, Also, it is a violation to carry a loaded gun in the park area although Highway 20, being inside the park, would probably be exempt if you were just travelling through.
    I live 3 miles from the North Cascades Park main office.
    I went right by there on a shooting trip today so I stopped in to ask some "innocent" questions.
    Hwy 20 is not in the park. It is in the NRA (National Recreation Area, not the good NRA) so state laws apply to carry along Hwy 20. That was confirmed by several in the office, and I will follow up with some maps.
    No one in the office could confirm cross-deputization with any local organization. I don't doubt it could be so, but nobody knew. Incredible.....

    Now I wonder under what authority the ranger could ask for or take personal property, even if only temporary...

  8. #8
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    I'll have to find my letter but here goes....

    I wrote the NPS about the section of Hwy 101 which travels through Olympic NP.

    All said and done if the road runs through Federal Land your weapon must be carried separate from the ammo.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    The National Rec Area is part of the park complex butis adminstered by the NPSand its a propriety jurisdiction so its limited. Traffic citations can be written by Rangers there. It doesnt suprprise me that you got blank stares. Unless you were talking to a LE Ranger they wouldnt have a clue about the jurisdictions etc.

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

    Post imported post

    You can thank former Governor Gary Locke for allowing any agency to write tickets on the state highways. I'll have to look it up to cite but basically any commissioned officer can now write a ticket. Meaning that a Spokane Deputy can pull you over in Pierce county and write you a speeding ticket or a Fish and Game officer can pull you over for speeding. The old "he's not in his jurisdiction" doesn't matter anymore.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    NavyLT wrote:
    Hammer wrote:
    got whatever info he needed from the pistol, prolly confirming it wasn't listed stolen.
    Or he could have been just holding on to the pistol for "officer protection". They are allowed to do that.
    Does the 4th amendment allow him to seize property without cause, however brief? Would he need RAS to conclude a citizen intended harm or malice? Or can he simply profile someone as a motorcycle rider and therefore suspicious of felonious crime?
    This is not intended to be inflammatory toward you, LT, but to pose the question just how far must we as citizens allow this to become a police state so we can feel "safe"?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    My line here is fine- a citation for speed is not a crime when defined by WA law. A crime is a misdemeanor or felony. A speed citation is neither.
    So, my issue is still the same- if no crime has been committed, is there RAS to seize personal property?

    I told my buddy he was under no compulsion to answer the question "do you have a firearm?"
    How is that pertinent to a speeding citation? Because speeders= armed felons?
    Turning it the other way round, at times on this board some have reported that when stopped, they have volunteered "I am armed" to have the LEO answer "So?"
    If officer safety were such a concern, why not cuff and stuff? There- threat neutralized.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Washington, USA
    Posts
    546

    Post imported post

    I would rather the police stick to the law. If that means arresting you to process your gun, then I'd rather be arrested and proceed with a title 18 lawsuit if the officer did not have RAS. I do not want to just give up my gun because it's easier, but I can't make that choice for other people or really tell them it's wrong.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Skagit Valley, Washington
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    Thank you- and there Is my point. If the LEO felt there was reason to fear the offender, then taking the gun was not enough. If there was no reason to fear the offender, then there was no reason to fear the gun in the hands of a citizen.

    I frequently carry a BUG. What if someone who does so hands over one, gets the officer to become complacent as he does his NCIC check, and there's another gun yet unsecured?


    antispam540 wrote:
    I would rather the police stick to the law. If that means arresting you to process your gun, then I'd rather be arrested and proceed with a title 18 lawsuit if the officer did not have RAS. I do not want to just give up my gun because it's easier, but I can't make that choice for other people or really tell them it's wrong.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Washington, USA
    Posts
    546

    Post imported post

    NavyLT wrote:
    Yes, I totally see your point. But why complain about it? The officer was clearly within the bounds of the law and didn't really hassle your friend. Notice the "rules" for a Terry Stop, though. Nowhere does it mention that the officer actually has to feel threatened or in danger. It only states reasonable suspicion of the presence of a weapon.
    I agree he had RAS, but does RAS give him the right to seize the gun and take it back to his car? The law seems to mention searches, but does undergoing a search mean temporary confiscation of firearms, or does it mean that the officer can check to see IF you have a firearm?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Washington, USA
    Posts
    546

    Post imported post

    The exclusionary law, as you said, seems to apply only to gathering evidence. If the temporary confiscation of firearms for "officer safety" isn't collecting evidence, then what laws is that governed under? If taking the gun to run the serial number is gathering evidence, why take the whole gun and not just the serial number? What lets them choose one over the other? If there is no law that says police officers can take weapons in the process of a search, then they can't take the weapons in the process of a search, right?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Washington, USA
    Posts
    546

    Post imported post

    I have seen the law that says they can search you for a weapon, but I haven't seen anything that says they can temporarily confiscate any weapons they find. I also haven't seen even a scrap of code that mentions officer safety or what civil liberties are suspended in its name.

    However, most of this seems to be being covered in http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/27661.html so I move we continue the discussion there. I feel like I'm thread-jacking

Posting Permissions

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