Denied entrance to Pierce county building

imported post

I went to the Pierce county city building to talk with a training officer with the Pierce county sheriff to arrange training with their swat team and my unit. (MCSF Bn.) This was an official assignment that I was sent on by my Capt. I get to the security check point and tell them that I am carrying a firearm (concealed) but that I am active duty military on official business. The private security contracters told me there was no exception to RCW 9.41.300. I told her that I read the RCW before I came there and that there definatly was an exemption. Unfortunatly my printer was out of ink and I couldn't print it out. She brings a PC sheriff down to talk to me. we go back and forth for about 20 minutes

"yes there is"

"no there isn't"

He also said that pierce county can enact their own laws which was supported by the RCW but pierce county has not enacted such laws. I eventually give up and check my gun just so I can get the mission over with. Well he denied for long enough that I missed the training officer who got off work 10 minutes earlier. I am going back tomorrow with the printed out RCW and I will try again. Here it is BTW: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300

imported post

Few questions..

Were you in uniform?
If you were, why were you carrying concealed if you were?

imported post

Not legitimate questions in the context of determining if he was acting lawfully and they were acting unlawfully, unless you can find some common law which defines the elements in the RCW.

imported post

Marines are not authorized to wear there utility uniforms off base and our Bn. supply does not have dress holsters.

imported post

deanf wrote:

Not legitimate questions in the context of determining if he was acting lawfully and they were acting unlawfully, unless you can find some common law which defines the elements in the RCW.

Click to expand...

Actually they are.

One more question, SemperCarry - Were you carrying your issued M9 or a personal weapon?

imported post

Actually they are.

Click to expand...

Discuss.

imported post

Not legit at all. Nowhere in the RCW or in USMC or Navy regs does it state that you have to be in uniform. What weapon I am carrying is also not relevant.

imported post

sempercarry wrote:

Not legit at all. Nowhere in the RCW or in USMC or Navy regs does it state that you have to be in uniform.  What weapon I am carrying is also not relevant.

Click to expand...

So you show up in civies, carrying your personal weapon, and want to carry your personally owned firearm into a secured facility. Am I gathering that correctly?

One more question, was this your CPT asking you to do this for your unit, or was this federal or state mandated request?

imported post

deanf wrote:

Actually they are.

Click to expand...

Discuss.

Click to expand...

Gladly:

RCW 9.41.300:

(6) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:

(a) A person engaged in military activities sponsored by the federal or state governments, while engaged in official duties;


A uniform would imply he was engaged in military activities while engaging in official duties. Same with his issued service weapon. A person showing up in civies asking for training for his unit does not meet the reasonable standard for an activity sponsored by the federal or state government.

A lot of police are former military, or current guard/reserves. A lot of them know the difference between an order from a CO, and an exception to the RCW. A simple order from a CO does not fall under the exception. You only meet one of the requirements and there are three:

Engaged in military activities
Sponsored by Federal or State governments
Engaged in official duties

imported post

Military activities- training

Federally sponsored- USMC is not a private security contractor

Official business- already discussed

Who said I was carrying my privatly owned weapon?

imported post

It matters not if he was carrying a personal weapon or not. The RCW makes no distinction. The county was wrong and he was well within the law to carry inside the secured area.

imported post

You are not L.E., and therefore have no commission card. No card, no entering the building with a weapon.

imported post

Well I happen to know a few things about military police and military regs. I know they are not allowed take their issued m9 off base unless granted special permission. I also know you are not allowed to carry your personally owned weapon in the performance of your duties. Heck, you can't even carry your personally owned firearm on base wihout written commanders approval. I asked you flat out if it was your issued m9. You dodged the question.

If it was you m9, you may have a leg to stand on. If not, you are carrying a firearm unauthorized in the performance of your official duties and thus don't qualify under rcw 9.41.300.

You and I both know that you aren't allowed to carry a weapon off base without a concealed permit, regardless of what your commanding officer said. Btw did you try and tell him this story?

imported post

You seem a little lossed. Lemme help. We carry weapons off base all the time, many of the Marines who do it are under 21. We did a 21 gun salute the other day and our security shooter was 19 carryinghis issued weapon (not an m-9 but another pistol) in a thigh rig while wearing civies. Very normal. Go ahead and read this as well: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.060 . I also believe there are some federal codes as well that pertain to military in performance of duties being exempt. As for speicial permission....Im going to guess you are in the Army? forgive me if I am wrong but in the Marines, we are expected be a step above the rest and the special permission is usually granted by the platoon Sgt. It never gets to the CO....he has better things to do

imported post

so even if you bring a piece of paper showing the rcw and they dont let you in you going to throw a tantrum and say i'm legal let me pass. this thread has one word in it that stands out



Fail

imported post

BigDaddy5 wrote:

Well I happen to know a few things about military police and military regs. I know they are not allowed take their issued m9 off base unless granted special permission. I also know you are not allowed to carry your personally owned weapon in the performance of your duties. Heck, you can't even carry your personally owned firearm on base wihout written commanders approval. I asked you flat out if it was your issued m9. You dodged the question.

If it was you m9, you may have a leg to stand on. If not, you are carrying a firearm unauthorized in the performance of your official duties and thus don't qualify under rcw 9.41.300.

You and I both know that you aren't allowed to carry a weapon off base without a concealed permit, regardless of what your commanding officer said. Btw did you try and tell him this story?

Click to expand...

The second that Military personnel set foot off post, their "authority" ends. At that point you have no more power than any other civilian, whether you are doing the bidding of the Military or not.

I will bet that NONE of your supervisors explicitly told you to carry a gun while off post/in the County City Building either.

Please advise your Capt. of this situation, and see if he urges you to push this issue. If your lucky, Pierce County won't give your C.O. a phone call and advise them of your actions.

imported post

Two words, posse comitatus.

imported post

He wasn't attempting law enforcement.

The point about his military authority ending off post is moot because he wasn't trying to exercise it anyway. Having a meeting with a civilian sheriff about a training issue is not exercising military authority.

Was he engaged in military duties? Yes, as explained in the opening post.
Were his duties sponsored by the federal or state government? Yes, as explained in the opening post.
Was he engaged in official duties? Yes, as explained in the opening post.
These are the only tests in the RCW and the only ones germane to the discussion. Unless you can come up with common law on the subject, or some other law that modifies the RCW in question (and post said references) your opinions have little credibility.

EVEN LESS credibility if you guys are accusing our Marine of lying or some other form of deception. If that's the case, please say so plainly so we can know where everyone stands.

imported post

I knew someone would send posse comitatus out there. I am not exercising any authority, I just don't like leaving guns with someone I don't know. Just like when we escort ammo guns and other valuable assets to and from ranges in Yakima, Fort Lewis or to ceremonial functions, there is always an armed Marine to watch over the group and weapons for self defense and defense of property not involving national security but inherently dangerous to others (guns and ammo). Posse comitatus has no bearing here and neither do any of the other arguments. I was sent on a mission by my PLATOON COMMANDER....not C.O., to get points of contact and attempt to arrange training with PC sheriff SWAT (official business) as per our SOP I drew my weapon from the armory and went about my business. The government looks at me like an investment and a very valuable tool and they will have it protected as much as possible. While I am working I am armed and they encourage those who are able, to buy their own guns while on liberty. The RCWs are very clear and they were in violation of them....plain and simple.

imported post

sempercarry wrote:

I knew someone would send posse comitatus out there. I am not exercising any authority, I just don't like leaving guns with someone I don't know. Just like when we escort ammo guns and other valuable assets to and from ranges in Yakima, Fort Lewis or to ceremonial functions, there is always an armed Marine to watch over the group and weapons for self defense and defense of property not involving national security but inherently dangerous to others (guns and ammo). Posse comitatus has no bearing here and neither do any of the other arguments. I was sent on a mission by my PLATOON COMMANDER....not C.O., to get points of contact and attempt to arrange training with PC sheriff SWAT (official business) as per our SOP I drew my weapon from the armory and went about my business. The government looks at me like an investment and a very valuable tool and they will have it protected as much as possible. While I am working I am armed and they encourage those who are able, to buy their own guns while on liberty. The RCWs are very clear and they were in violation of them....plain and simple.

Click to expand...

What your SOP is is not an issue when it comes with RCW's. While I understand and respect Marine Corps SOP, it can be inviolation of state law.

The fact that you drew your service weapon from the armory was an important fact you left out and then promptly ignored when I asked about it. That is a VERY distinguishing fact, and separates you from any other military personnel who are tasked with something, leave base in civies, and then choose to carry their personally owned firearm while completing the task.

The fact that you drew your weapon from the armory and then were allowed to carry it off base as per SOP is evident in the fact that you were indeed carrying out official duties, which is what I was implying by asking the questions to begin with. While I am a little unsure of why you were not allowed or required to wear your uniform, that is not my place to question that policy. What does matter is that you were tasked by your officer, drew your weapon from the armory, and then attempted to complete that order.

Had you not been carrying your service weapon, and choosing to carry your privately owned firearm, then you would not have fallen under the RCW. Your assignment would no longer fall under that RCW because you are carrying your personally owned weapon, which would mean you are carrying a weapon outside of the scope of your official duties.



The fact that your under-21 service members were carrying their weapons to and from funeral processions doesn’t matter in that regard. Again, they were carrying their issued weapons in the performance of their official duties. That was a key fact I was trying to establish.



All of these facts go to the reasonable person standard, meaning would a reasonable person believe a soldier carrying a concealed, personally owned firearm, be discharging their official duties? The answer to that is no. But would a reasonable person believe a soldier carrying an issued weapon in civilian clothes believe they were discharging their official duties? That’s more likely.



Good luck tomorrow.