Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 91

Thread: Pierce County Breaking the Law Starting June 16th:

  1. #1
    Regular Member Bobarino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    http://blog.thenewstribune.com/crime...#comment-17924

    FYI: County won't hold your knives, Mace while you visit courthouse Posted By Adam Lynn on June 3, 2010 at 11:43 am var addthis_pub="tacoma"; Share this
    Pierce County is discontinuing its practice of temporarily holding onto inappropriate items people try to bring into the County-City Building and other secured locations.
    Prohibited items include but are not limited to:
    • Firearms and ammunition
    • Edged weapons
    • Impact weapons
    • Explosives/improvised explosive device components
    • Flammable liquids
    • Chemical agents
    • Hazardous Materials
    • Handcuffs/handcuff keys
    • Electronic self defense devices
    • Toy guns or replicas
    Leave that stuff at home or in the car, county officials say.
    The new rules go into effect June 16.
    This is, of course in direct violation of 9.41.300(1)(b)

    RCW 9.41.300Weapons prohibited in certain places — Local laws and ordinances — Exceptions — Penalty.
    (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:

    (a) The restricted access areas of a jail, or of a law enforcement facility, or any place used for the confinement of a person (i) arrested for, charged with, or convicted of an offense, (ii) held for extradition or as a material witness, or (iii) otherwise confined pursuant to an order of a court, except an order under chapter 13.32A or 13.34 RCW. Restricted access areas do not include common areas of egress or ingress open to the general public;

    (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).

    For purposes of this subsection (1)(b), "weapon" means any firearm, explosive as defined in RCW 70.74.010, or any weapon of the kind usually known as slung shot, sand club, or metal knuckles, or any knife, dagger, dirk, or other similar weapon that is capable of causing death or bodily injury and is commonly used with the intent to cause death or bodily injury.

    In addition, the local legislative authority shall provide either a stationary locked box sufficient in size for pistols and key to a weapon owner for weapon storage, or shall designate an official to receive weapons for safekeeping, during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building. The locked box or designated official shall be located within the same building used in connection with court proceedings. The local legislative authority shall be liable for any negligence causing damage to or loss of a weapon either placed in a locked box or left with an official during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building.

    The local judicial authority shall designate and clearly mark those areas where weapons are prohibited, and shall post notices at each entrance to the building of the prohibition against weapons in the restricted areas;
    http://www.piercecountywa.org/cfapps...node_id=102652

    MEDIA CONTACTS:
    Mike Dorman, Pierce County Facilities Management security manager
    253-798-6184
    mdorman@co.pierce.wa.us
    Hunter George, Pierce County Communications director
    253-798-6606
    hgeorge@co.pierce.wa.us



  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    This change in court security screening procedures does not affect procedures applicable to citizens who possess valid concealed weapons permits.
    Commissioned Law Enforcement Officers
    According to the Pierce County website. http://www.piercecountywa.org/cfapps...node_id=102652



    However, that would exclude someone in a position of open carry and/or sterile carry.


    Live Free or Die!

  3. #3
    Regular Member Bobarino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    it also excludes people that got a ride and got dropped off, rode a bike, walked, took the bus, took a cab etc etc etc. the law doesn't state you have to have a CPL to get a lockbox, nor does it exclude "slung shot, sand club, or metal knuckles, or any knife, dagger, dirk, or other similar weapon that is capable of causing death or bodily injury and is commonly used with the intent to cause death or bodily injury."

    that includes pepper spray, impact weapons and the like.

    They are setting themselves up for a lot of charges dropped and dismissed cases due to being illegally denied entry into their scheduled court proceedings.

    Bobby

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    Email sent to the entire County Council and City Council:



    Regarding your updated courthouse security procedure effective June 16, 2010. ]http://www.piercecountywa.org/cfapps/internet/news.cfm?node_id=102652]http://www.piercecountywa.org/cfapps/internet/news.cfm?node_id=102652[/url]

    I would suggest that you review the policy in regards to firearms and specifically in regards to Washington state preemption. RCW 9.41.290 ]http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.290]http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.290[/url]

    "The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality."

    Pierce County does not have authority to exclude someone in possession of a firearm from the courthouse premiseswho is not a CPL holder but instead prefers to 'open carry' their firearm. Open carry is legal in the state of Washington and no CPL is required. Therefore, the same lock box requirement without a CPL or ID is required for someone wishing to check a firearm in direct concurrence with RCW 9.41.300 which states:http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300

    "In addition, the local legislative authority shall provide either a stationary locked box sufficient in size for pistols and key to a weapon owner for weapon storage, or shall designate an official to receive weapons for safekeeping, during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building. The locked box or designated official shall be located within the same building used in connection with court proceedings. The local legislative authority shall be liable for any negligence causing damage to or loss of a weapon either placed in a locked box or left with an official during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building."

    As you can see in 9.41.300 there is no requirement for a citizen to be a CPL holder when visiting a restricted building. I would be more than willing to assist you in understanding open carry and how it applies in this matter.


    Regards,
    Live Free or Die!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    93

    Post imported post

    City of Tacoma: But...but! You don't understand!!!! It's necessary for us to do this to save time and (really) not have to deal with these little annoyances you people from the public wish to heap on us.

    Our response: TOUGH ****!!! The law is the law!

    Notice they are even being hard-assed to other LEOs:

    This change in court security screening procedures does not affect procedures applicable to citizens who possess valid concealed weapons permits.
    Commissioned Law Enforcement Officers


    Effective June 16, the following procedures apply to commissioned law enforcement officers who wish to retain their weapon while in a Pierce County courthouse.

    All commissioned local, state and federal law enforcement officers who wish to carry their weapon in a Pierce County courthouse shall provide their departmental photo ID to court security staff when entering the courthouse for verification of identity and status as a commissioned law enforcement officer. Officers shall advise court security staff of the purpose of their visit, affirm they are acting in their official capacity and disclose their destination in the courthouse. Pierce County Sheriff's Department commissioned officers are exempt from this requirement when on duty and acting in an official capacity.

    Additionally, you will notice the article is missing something very important. LEOs are required to show ID and verify who they are. Nothing was said was said about JQ Public at all. This leads me to believe they will deny the public citizen any kind of access, regardless of CPL.



  6. #6
    Regular Member Son_of_Perdition's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SW , Washington, USA
    Posts
    166

    Post imported post

    gogo, well played old man. I particularly like the wording they used "inappropriate items" .It sure is a good thing a hand gun is a very appropriate item.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    923

    Post imported post

    Maybe a few people should get together to go to a courthouse on the 16th or 17th, with copies of the RCW and try to check weapons. Get video and audio of them knowingly and willfully violating state law.
    A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    I did get a response back from a county council member that the policy is on the agenda for review.
    I read the e-mail and I sent a request for review of the issue to our county council legal staff. This policy was implemented by the county executive. We can either over ride her policy via legislation or via legal review. Either way, it is now on our agenda and will have it discussed at our next study session.
    Live Free or Die!

  9. #9
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522

    Post imported post

    I'm sure they didnt give you any kind of time frame that there would be a decision on this matter?
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    TheJeepster wrote:
    City of Tacoma: But...but! You don't understand!!!! It's necessary for us to do this to save time and (really) not have to deal with these little annoyances you people from the public wish to heap on us.

    Our response: TOUGH @#$%!!! The law is the law!

    Notice they are even being hard-assed to other LEOs:

    This change in court security screening procedures does not affect procedures applicable to citizens who possess valid concealed weapons permits.
    Commissioned Law Enforcement Officers


    Effective June 16, the following procedures apply to commissioned law enforcement officers who wish to retain their weapon while in a Pierce County courthouse.

    All commissioned local, state and federal law enforcement officers who wish to carry their weapon in a Pierce County courthouse shall provide their departmental photo ID to court security staff when entering the courthouse for verification of identity and status as a commissioned law enforcement officer. Officers shall advise court security staff of the purpose of their visit, affirm they are acting in their official capacity and disclose their destination in the courthouse. Pierce County Sheriff's Department commissioned officers are exempt from this requirement when on duty and acting in an official capacity.

    Additionally, you will notice the article is missing something very important. LEOs are required to show ID and verify who they are. Nothing was said was said about JQ Public at all. This leads me to believe they will deny the public citizen any kind of access, regardless of CPL.

    That's good though. They need to make sure they're actually law enforcement officers who are making themselves present, rather than some schmuck impersonating one. According to the RCW, they can't make special lock box exceptions to those with a CPL. You don't have to have a CPL in order to secure your weapons in their lock box. Who does one report this to?

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    amzbrady wrote:
    I'm sure they didnt give you any kind of time frame that there would be a decision on this matter?
    No, but I will follow up and check thier posted agenda. The council member is a facebook friend so I am sure I will get response.
    Live Free or Die!

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    What happens if they refuse to provide a lock box? Is it up to the citizen to file a suit against the city, or will a state agency pursue this matter?

    If a state agency pursues it, what grounds do they have? Again, this does not appear to be a punishable offense. It seems that whenever preemption laws are in affect, or laws that restrict certain government agencies are in affect, there isn't a punishment for their violation.

    Who would one refer a violation to?

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    They do not have to provide a lock box, instead they can provide an official for safekeeping.

    In addition, the local legislative authority shall provide either a stationary locked box sufficient in size for pistols and key to a weapon owner for weapon storage, or shall designate an official to receive weapons for safekeeping, during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building. The locked box or designated official shall be located within the same building used in connection with court proceedings. The local legislative authority shall be liable for any negligence causing damage to or loss of a weapon either placed in a locked box or left with an official during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building.
    I suppose that if the law is not followed then you would have to file a lawsuit to forcer their compliance.
    Live Free or Die!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Port Angeles, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    The best mechanism to force them to do what they are required to do is probably a writ of mandamus. Alternatively, a writ of prohibition could prevent them from implementing the new policy.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Do you know if the municipal or superior court is suppose to determine if a law is in compliance with state law? Or do the Mayor/Executive and council have full authority in law making?

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    olypendrew wrote:
    The best mechanism to force them to do what they are required to do is probably a writ of mandamus.
    So if there is not a positive response from the city and county council, et al, then I should go to the courthouse and be refused entry. (Sterile carry)

    Then take that information to the Superior Court of Pierce County and petition for a writ of mandamus?
    Live Free or Die!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    gogodawgs wrote:
    olypendrew wrote:
    The best mechanism to force them to do what they are required to do is probably a writ of mandamus.
    So if there is not a positive response from the city and county council, et al, then I should go to the courthouse and be refused entry. (Sterile carry)

    Then take that information to the Superior Court of Pierce County and petition for a writ of mandamus?
    That's why I was wondering if the court has to determine if the law is in compliance before OKing it... probably not though.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Port Angeles, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    I'm not sure if being refused entry would be necessary, but it probably wouldn't hurt. I think that one could probably just state in an affidavit that one would like to go there and check a weapon, as provided in the RCWs, but Pierce County has indicated in an official publication that that process is insufficient. I don't think one needs to wait until the harm has actually occurred, meaning the refused entry. But I haven't researched any of this, so no one should consider it legal advice.

    The legal maneuvering would be similar to the Seattle parks ban, where the plaintiffs had to merely state that hey would like to go to the parks armed, but a rule was enacted that prevented them from being able to do so.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the county makes some changes, now that this has come to its attention.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    This is the kind of small but important thing that the WAC should be all over (see my reply in recent thread about the WAC.)

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    This is the kind of small but important thing that the WAC should be all over (see my reply in recent thread about the WAC.)
    How is that? The exemption for CPL holders is still in place according to the new rules.

    Only open carry is forgotten about....

    I understand your premise, but how would an organization like WAC keep up to date and handle all of these types of issues. And if they do, they can put me on the payroll and I will personally monitor and work on these kind of things.
    Live Free or Die!

  21. #21
    Regular Member SnarlyWino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, United States
    Posts
    375

    Post imported post

    Would an inquiry to the state attorney general's office not be in order?
    Keep Calm and Carry On,

    Snarly

    Pro Deo, Pro Familia, Pro Patria

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    SnarlyWino wrote:
    Would an inquiry to the state attorney general's office not be in order?
    No it would not. He does not enforce law or bring criminal complaints forward. It needs to be a City or County attorney, and fat chance of that happening.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    gogodawgs wrote:
    olypendrew wrote:
    The best mechanism to force them to do what they are required to do is probably a writ of mandamus.
    So if there is not a positive response from the city and county council, et al, then I should go to the courthouse and be refused entry. (Sterile carry)

    Then take that information to the Superior Court of Pierce County and petition for a writ of mandamus?
    Have a sheriff's deputy accompany you when you make your attempt.

    When they refuse to check/receive your side arm, point out the (misdemeanor) criminal violation(s) of two seperate laws that just occurred in the deputy's presence. The deputy will then be REQUIRED to arrest (or at the very least cite and release) the one(s) responsible for violating the law or be placed in legal jeopardy themselves.

    :celebrate

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    117

    Post imported post


    Hoplophobia is a social disease.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Phssthpok wrote:
    gogodawgs wrote:
    olypendrew wrote:
    The best mechanism to force them to do what they are required to do is probably a writ of mandamus.
    So if there is not a positive response from the city and county council, et al, then I should go to the courthouse and be refused entry. (Sterile carry)

    Then take that information to the Superior Court of Pierce County and petition for a writ of mandamus?
    Have a sheriff's deputy accompany you when you make your attempt.

    When they refuse to check/receive your side arm, point out the (misdemeanor) criminal violation(s) of two seperate laws that just occurred in the deputy's presence. The deputy will then be REQUIRED to arrest (or at the very least cite and release) the one(s) responsible for violating the law or be placed in legal jeopardy themselves.

    :celebrate
    How did that work for you? We never did hear any outcome.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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