• 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.

why cant the judge be armed while on duty?

Tony Santiago

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
41
Location
, ,
imported post

i was in king county juvenile court for my younger brothers court hearing for a couple hours last week, and when i was in the lobby, i noticed the judge come in, and he had to walk through the metal detector. why cant the judge come to court armed?
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

RCW 9.41.300(1) It is unlawful for any person to enter the following places when he or she knowingly possesses or knowingly has under his or her control a weapon:

(b) Those areas in any building which are used in connection with court proceedings, including courtrooms, jury rooms, judge's chambers, offices and areas used to conduct court business, waiting areas, and corridors adjacent to areas used in connection with court proceedings. The restricted areas do not include common areas of ingress and egress to the building that is used in connection with court proceedings, when it is possible to protect court areas without restricting ingress and egress to the building. The restricted areas shall be the minimum necessary to fulfill the objective of this subsection (1)(b).

(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;

(b) Law enforcement personnel, except that subsection (1)(b) of this section does apply to a law enforcement officer who is present at a courthouse building as a party to an action under chapter 10.14, 10.99, or 26.50 RCW, or an action under Title 26 RCW where any party has alleged the existence of domestic violence as defined in RCW 26.50.010; or

(c) Security personnel while engaged in official duties.

(7) Subsection (1)(a) of this section does not apply to a person licensed pursuant to RCW 9.41.070 who, upon entering the place or facility, directly and promptly proceeds to the administrator of the facility or the administrator's designee and obtains written permission to possess the firearm while on the premises or checks his or her firearm. The person may reclaim the firearms upon leaving but must immediately and directly depart from the place or facility.

(8) Subsection (1)(c) of this section does not apply to any administrator or employee of the facility or to any person who, upon entering the place or facility, directly and promptly proceeds to the administrator of the facility or the administrator's designee and obtains written permission to possess the firearm while on the premises.


There's nothing in the RCW's that allows for the judge to carry a firearm.
 

Glock17

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
93
Location
Federal Way, WA
imported post

I would think they should have the right to be armed. I am guessing this is a Washington State law. And it is not this way in other states. I for one don't believe there is any place on Earth that a gun isn't permitted. But thats because I don't believe being armed is a privilage. Cheers
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

Glock17 wrote:
I would think they should have the right to be armed. I am guessing this is a Washington State law. And it is not this way in other states. I for one don't believe there is any place on Earth that a gun isn't permitted. But thats because I don't believe being armed is a privilage. Cheers
I agree. I feel judges should be able to arm themselves as well, rather than relying in the court protection officer. What happens if the court officer is shot and wounded/killed?
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

j2l3 wrote:
Only federal judges have US Marshall's....
The judges are protected by whatever law enforcement agency is responsible for the particular jurisdiction of the judge/court.

If it's a Federal court, then it's the U.S. Marshals, if it's a State Supreme Court, then it's State Patrol. If it's Superior Court, then it's a Sheriff's Deputy, and if it's a municipal court, then it's a municipal police officer.

At least that's how it normally works.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:
What do you mean by buying his weapon?
That tax payers don't provide his weapon. Just like I am fine with anybody gov. official or not carrying for their own everyday protection just not the public paying for it.
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

I've heard of a few of them wearing a handgun under their robes. I know it'd technically be illegal, but it's "their" courtroom, and it's not like the baliff is going to pat them down when they enter the room. If I was a judge, I might do the same thing.



-But, that was heresay, and totally, completely inadmissable in court...
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

G20-IWB24/7 wrote:
I've heard of a few of them wearing a handgun under their robes. I know it'd technically be illegal, but it's "their" courtroom, and it's not like the baliff is going to pat them down when they enter the room. If I was a judge, I might do the same thing.



-But, that was heresay, and totally, completely inadmissable in court...
I'm pretty sure they do have to walk through the metal detectors. At least at the two courts I've been to they did.
 

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

They should arm themselves. It's actually another good example of someone putting all their faith in the fact that they are protected just because the police are there. I'm surprised we havent already passed on to an america that is totally locked down behind bullet proof glass, like some convenience store clerks. judges, bus drivers, taxi cab drivers. I figure it's only a matter of time. Just how much time is the answer.
 

Glock17

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
93
Location
Federal Way, WA
imported post

I think I saw an episode of Law and Order one time where a judge shot a defendent who grabbed an officers gun? Maybe someone else saw this episode? Well anyways I would think some judges do arm themselves. People can do some crazy things when the jury lets out a vertict. Guilty as Charged! :what:
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
They don't walk through metal detectors here in Whatcom, none of the employees do.
When I was on jury duty, I saw judges and attorneys both go through the detector, in King County.
 
Top