VonKonig
Regular Member
imported post
I try to be very careful and meticulous in my own research bothof the information posted here and within the WAC and RCW'sso I don't wasteanyone's time with my questions....
But nowhere do I see how I should deal with this problem/Catch-22 of being able to carry (as provided by state preemption), but not being able to use my tool of self defense (firearm inmy case) when it is within the city, county or municipality's discretion, and ability,to regulate/prevent the discharge of same.
Am I missing something or have they found a way to emasculate those of us who choose to carry for personal defense?:
As in: "Sure you can carry here. Fine. But don't think about discharging that thing, regardless of the reason, or we'll use the full force of the law, as authorized, to tack you to a wall, Mister! -- that's why we have police!"
If this has been discussed at length before in this forum, and I missed it, please accept my apologies in advance and point me to the right thread.
Thanks!
I try to be very careful and meticulous in my own research bothof the information posted here and within the WAC and RCW'sso I don't wasteanyone's time with my questions....
But nowhere do I see how I should deal with this problem/Catch-22 of being able to carry (as provided by state preemption), but not being able to use my tool of self defense (firearm inmy case) when it is within the city, county or municipality's discretion, and ability,to regulate/prevent the discharge of same.
Am I missing something or have they found a way to emasculate those of us who choose to carry for personal defense?:
As in: "Sure you can carry here. Fine. But don't think about discharging that thing, regardless of the reason, or we'll use the full force of the law, as authorized, to tack you to a wall, Mister! -- that's why we have police!"
If this has been discussed at length before in this forum, and I missed it, please accept my apologies in advance and point me to the right thread.
Thanks!