• 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.

Clark County Courthouse

amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
triehl27 said:
M1Gunr,

I don't see the porttion about recording of a law enforcement or public official while they are on duty.

I have searched and can't find it here in the forums although at some point I know it has been cited at least once.

I also can't find the RCW associated with it.
Click to expand...

It's not so much spelled out in the RCW as it is the result of a Court of Appeasl decision here:

http://www.copwatch.org/statevflora.htm

"The State urges us to adopt the view that public officers performing an official function on a public thoroughfare in the presence of a third party and within the sight and hearing of passersby enjoy a privacy interest which they may assert under the statute. We reject that view as wholly without merit. "
 
T

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
amlevin said:
It's not so much spelled out in the RCW as it is the result of a Court of Appeasl decision here:

http://www.copwatch.org/statevflora.htm

"The State urges us to adopt the view that public officers performing an official function on a public thoroughfare in the presence of a third party and within the sight and hearing of passersby enjoy a privacy interest which they may assert under the statute. We reject that view as wholly without merit. "
Click to expand...

Don't forget this, which relies on that but makes it more explicit:
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1344599.html

Because it was clearly established under Washington law at the time of the arrest that recording a police officer in the performance of his public duties was not a violation of the Privacy Act and it was unreasonable for Chief Nelson to believe otherwise, we hold that the Chief is not entitled to qualified immunity.  
Click to expand...
 
amzbrady

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
I just have to think that if state laws were taught from K - 12, there would be alot less violations of the law on both sides. The more people that know the law, would make it harder for the authorities to violate your rights, and ignorance of the law would have a much stronger meaning. We were barely taught anything pertaining to the US in the mandatory history classes in our school, and the classes were so uninvolved that I only remember small bits and pieces, pilgrams, slaves, the british are coming, north and south fought, custer screwed up big time, Indians got screwed big time, Martin luther King had a dream, So did I until the teacher woke me up, and a rocket blew up with a school teacher. That was about it. Course I just wanted to get out of school so I could have a beer, and get laid. They wouldnt let me do that in school anymore.
 
D

devildoc5

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
791
Location
Somewhere over run with mud(s)
I hate to say this as I am 100% CERTAIN it will get miscostrued and turned a complete 180 degrees from my intentions.

The problem with teaching any semblance of ACCURATE constitutional history in schools is that there is TOO much emphasis placed on "multicultural interacial diversity" or whatever they wanna call it now a days.

Yes diversity is cool and important, as well as respecting others cultures.

HOWEVER once you move to this country and obtain citizenship (well you should at least...nother topic, nother time) shouldn't you cease to be a latvian-estonian-croatian-japanese-taiwanese-pakistani-afghani-african-portugese-irish american and become a friggin AMERICAN?

Yes you can honor your culture and raise your kids to respect your background and their heritage, however shouldn't you raise them to be AMERICANS first????

Perhaps if we focused just a smidge less on EVERYONE ELSE'S history, and more on the history that brings us all together, that of AMERICA. We might then be able to all understand, to a certain extent, the laws, freedoms, regulations, priveleges and HONOR of America...
 
amzbrady

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
I think past history (not related to the Americas) should be an elective and current history should be mandatory, First and formost they should teach law, not history. History, yes is where law started but that is where History needs to be involved, How in history our laws were made. As far as immigrants conforming to the US, yes. Our forefathers did. I like Roosevelt.

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907
 
J

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
bwboley said:
so they wouldnt give me the key also was gunna kick me out for not gunna give them my id so please tell me were i file a complant
Click to expand...

Were they going to check it or put it into a locker? If they check it there are not required to provide the key. If they were storing it in a lockbox then a key should have been provided. Keep in mind that the ID may be so they do not release a firearm to the wrong person.

Contact the Sheriff to file a complaint as he is in charge of the County Courthouse and his officers are the ones that you had an issue with.
 
gogodawgs

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
joeroket said:
Were they going to check it or put it into a locker? If they check it there are not required to provide the key. If they were storing it in a lockbox then a key should have been provided. Keep in mind that the ID may be so they do not release a firearm to the wrong person.

Contact the Sheriff to file a complaint as he is in charge of the County Courthouse and his officers are the ones that you had an issue with.
Click to expand...

Same thing happens up here at the Pierce Co building. They say it's so they know who to give the firearm too.

Here is a way around there BS. Carry NO ID and NO CPL. Take a picture of your firearm and write the serial number on the firerm. When they give you the line: "so we know we give the firearm back the the right person". Show the officer the picture and agree that the serial number matches. If he doesn't like it ask for his supervisor. Have the officer sign your picture and explain that you know which firearm is yours.

This is what I will do the next time I go to Pierce Co.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
gogodawgs said:
Same thing happens up here at the Pierce Co building. They say it's so they know who to give the firearm too.

Here is a way around there BS. Carry NO ID and NO CPL. Take a picture of your firearm and write the serial number on the firerm. When they give you the line: "so we know we give the firearm back the the right person". Show the officer the picture and agree that the serial number matches. If he doesn't like it ask for his supervisor. Have the officer sign your picture and explain that you know which firearm is yours.

This is what I will do the next time I go to Pierce Co.
Click to expand...

Of course if they didn't want to just be buttholes they could just give you a receipt and you have to provide the reciept to regain the firearm. They'd rather take the lazy approach.
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
gogodawgs said:
Same thing happens up here at the Pierce Co building. They say it's so they know who to give the firearm too.

Here is a way around there BS. Carry NO ID and NO CPL. Take a picture of your firearm and write the serial number on the firerm. When they give you the line: "so we know we give the firearm back the the right person". Show the officer the picture and agree that the serial number matches. If he doesn't like it ask for his supervisor. Have the officer sign your picture and explain that you know which firearm is yours.

This is what I will do the next time I go to Pierce Co.
Click to expand...

I got Whatcom County Courthouse trained....:banana:

They didn't unholster their guns there in Like they did against Mike did they?
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
gogodawgs said:
No, they have never unholstered. Just returned the gun unloaded and won't let you load it until you get back to your car. Next time I will not have a car.
Click to expand...

Sterile and no vehicle....I love it.
I thought about putting a drop of wax on my trigger for my holster so I could tell if the firearm was removed if I ever had to check it in with personnel.
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
gogodawgs said:
I have thought the same thing. I might even zip tie it to the holster, or something. How infuriating it was.
Click to expand...

Zip tie better, that would make sure it was a deliberate act.
Of course it would render it useless in a self defense scenario but I suppose you could zip tie it right there in front of them and then cut it the second you get it back. Making a very pointed statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top