What Washington Gun Laws are Unconstitutional, post McDonald?

Metalhead47 · Jun 30, 2010

devildoc5 said:
ok but isnt that vehicle AND it's contents still your private property?

Regardless of where it is located at?

That is kinda what I was getting at...

I guess it is one of the ever lasting battles of where do your rights end and mine begin?

I tend to look at it that it is your private property if you own it regardless of where it is residing. An analogy would be the same as I posted above about visiting a friend. If it is my property then how can someone tell me what I can and cant do in it? Not saying my analogy was completely accurate, however it does not require a stretch of the imagination to see the same logic, even if it is flawed, I guess that is what I was trying to point out.

Sorry guess I am just in one of those moods today.....

See this is where private property rights vs private property rights get sticky. My wife & I are in the same boat, both our employers forbid weapons on company property, employee vehicles specifically mentioned. Whether they have the right to search said vehicles is iffy, and we wouldn't face legal charges if something were discovered, but we could be fired.

A few states recently (Oklahoma comes to mind) passed laws that prohibit employers from prohibiting weapons in employee vehicles on company property, and also frees the company from any liability if the weapons were used nefariously.

Tomas · Jun 30, 2010

gogodawgs said:
Does this happen?

Any company that I have worked for has just restricted weapons from the building.

Has anyone had their vehicle searched by an employer?

Has anyone witnessed another's vehicle searched by an employer?

Has anyone heard (hearsay) of a vehicle search by an employer?

Mine searched? NO.
Another's searched? YES.

Company property was disappearing, they kept checking stock, when it suddenly went down they searched all employee vehicles in the lot (and found the missing property in a guy's van).

It was company security, not police doing the search, and everyone had agreed, as a condition of employment, to those searches as a part of the hiring process.

(Next time you enter a military establishment note the sign that says you agree to personal and vehicle searches while on the property. Many company lots have that sort of signage, too, just reinforcing / reminding employees what they already agreed to.)

ak56 · Jun 30, 2010

devildoc5 said:
ok but isnt that vehicle AND it's contents still your private property?

Regardless of where it is located at?

That is kinda what I was getting at...

I guess it is one of the ever lasting battles of where do your rights end and mine begin?

I tend to look at it that it is your private property if you own it regardless of where it is residing. An analogy would be the same as I posted above about visiting a friend. If it is my property then how can someone tell me what I can and cant do in it? Not saying my analogy was completely accurate, however it does not require a stretch of the imagination to see the same logic, even if it is flawed, I guess that is what I was trying to point out.

Sorry guess I am just in one of those moods today.....

Look at it this way: The pocket of my jeans and the contents are my property. That does not mean that I can carry a gun in my pocket at my place of employment if they have a rule against carrying, just because it is in my pocket. Your car is just a large pocket to them.

Bob Warden · Jun 30, 2010

Dave_pro2a said:
According to BS spewed by Bob Warden on TV tonight, (and I paraphrase) "banning firearms in bars will obviously pass Constitutional muster post McDonald, because of the effect alcohol has on the brain and a person judgement." What stupidtastic reasoning was he applying:

Because everyone in a bar is drunk?
Because you can't be in a bar, and be stone cold sober?
Because no one needs to exercise their inalienable rights once they past the threshold of a establishment that serves alcohol?
Because bars are inherently safer than parks?

What about all the states that DO allow CCW and open carry in bars, without any rivers of blood flowing as a result?

Bob, here's a hint... your 15 minutes are over. Go 'help' some other cause, please.

Edited to add: found the quote

http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-06282010-gunbanseattle,0,4378255.story

Fundamentally, Bob agrees with McGinn: ban guns.

Nice logic, Captain Brain Power! It is NOT my opinion that firearms should be banned in bars, it is my opinion that the law that does so will be found to be a constitutional restriction. Expressing a legal opinion on the application of the law is not the same thing as expressing agreement with the outcome of such application.

devildoc5 · Jun 30, 2010

a self propelled, gas operated, movable pocket...I guess.

sorry but there are just some things that seem extremely absurd, this being one of them...

j2l3 · Jun 30, 2010

In Washington the militia is defined as....

oneeyeross said:
I personally don't have an issue with full auto or select fire weapons, but that is just me. I don't like them. Yes, when younger, I had the opportunity to shoot a bunch of ammo you tax payers paid for, and kinda enjoyed it...but I didn't like having to hump all them bullets all the time. Being a tanker, though, we didn't have to shoot the little gun that much (M3A1 sub machine gun)...

I can see the select fire law falling fairly quickly, though, on militia grounds. Since, according to the Miller decision, militia members are required to appear with a "weapon of the type and caliber in general usage" that would mean that all males 17-45 should have a select fire AR....but that's just my opinion.

RCW 38.04.030

Composition of the militia.

</B>The militia of the state of Washington shall consist of all able bodied citizens of the United States and all other able bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing within this state, who shall be more than eighteen years of age, and shall include all persons who are members of the national guard and the state guard, and said militia shall be divided into two classes, the organized militia and the unorganized militia.
[1989 c 19 § 3; 1973 1st ex.s. c 154 § 55; 1963 c 74 § 1; 1943 c 130 § 2; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 8603-2. Prior: 1917 c 107 § 1; 1909 c 134 § 2; 1895 c 108 § 2.]

Notes:

Severability -- 1973 1st ex.s. c 154: See note following RCW 2.12.030. Militia -- Who liable to military duty: State Constitution Art. 10 § 1.

Dave_pro2a · Jun 30, 2010

Bob Warden said:
Nice logic, Captain Brain Power! It is NOT my opinion that firearms should be banned in bars, it is my opinion that the law that does so will be found to be a constitutional restriction. Expressing a legal opinion on the application of the law is not the same thing as expressing agreement with the outcome of such application.

"inherently dangerous situation" is what you called it. That's your opinion, that's your agreement with the ban.

If you're going to be a media whore, and pander to liberals while doing it by agreeing to 'reasonable bans', be prepared for flak.

gogodawgs · Jun 30, 2010

Bob Warden said:
Nice logic, Captain Brain Power! It is NOT my opinion that firearms should be banned in bars, it is my opinion that the law that does so will be found to be a constitutional restriction. Expressing a legal opinion on the application of the law is not the same thing as expressing agreement with the outcome of such application.

Bob,

Will the courts find a less restrictive manner in which to apply the safety issue at question with alcohol and guns? Certainly there are other examples of less restrictive means to acheive the goal. There are several states that allow for holstered firearms in bars. The mere posession of a firearm in the bar does not constitute a safety hazard.

tyguy808 · Jun 30, 2010

Ruby said:
Are you ready to give up YOUR private property rights?!?

Its not about MY PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, its about the BUSINESSES that ban the RIGHTS of the people. Since it is now a federally recognized right, can they still trespass me? They cannot trespass you for being methodist (per say), but they can stomp on my 2A?

Bob Warden · Jun 30, 2010

gogodawgs said:
Bob,

Will the courts find a less restrictive manner in which to apply the safety issue at question with alcohol and guns? Certainly there are other examples of less restrictive means to acheive the goal. There are several states that allow for holstered firearms in bars. The mere posession of a firearm in the bar does not constitute a safety hazard.

My concern is the language in both Heller and now in McDonald saying that restrictions in "sensitive places" will be constitutional. So the big question left for the next few years of 2 Am litigation is which "places" are "sensitive." Both Heller and McDonald say that schools and federal buildings qualify, which I think is a concern. What, exactly, about schools and federal buildings make them places where gun restrictions should be okay? And if the Court already says those places are sensitive, then pretty clearly places that exist primarily to serve a substance that directly and adversely affects judgment are going to be found "sensitive."

Again, this is an opinion based on my reading of the cases, not my personal agenda.

Dave_pro2a: I'm not agreeing with the concept of reasonable restrictions, I just know how to read.

tai4de2 · Jun 30, 2010

What makes a school a sensitive place? The overriding, argument-ending, feel-good tool-of-tyrants justification: "b-b-but it's for the children." Obviously.

Tomas · Jun 30, 2010

Rationally, a school, with children, is a place where right thinking adults should be even more vigilent in protecting them from outside dangers - not disarming themselves so that any nutcase can come in and cause harm.

In much earlier days of this country, that would have been easily and readily understood.

These days, however, this society is much, much too used to the idea of having "someone else" protect and coddle them, and refuses to accept the responsibility.

Where oh where did we go wrong?

devildoc5 · Jun 30, 2010

not only protect them, but provide for them.

Let's not forget here it is (VERY UNFORTUNATELY) my generation who believes we are entitled to everything. I was born so you have to give it to me.

Thankfully I was brought up that the only way you get something is through your own actions whether it be working for money or carrying to protect your life.

Bersa.380 · Jul 1, 2010

Good thread .. .. ..

gogodawgs · Jul 1, 2010

To be fair...

I stole the idea from another state and though it would be enlightening.

Bersa.380 said:
Good thread .. .. ..

Bill Starks · Jul 1, 2010

From NW Firearms thread posted by user RanB:
I am meeting with Representative Haigh about bill 1604 to allow silencer use in WA State. It will take place in her Shelton office on the morning of 19 July or the afternoon of 20 July. I would like to bring another person along as two heads are better than one. Anyone interested? Thanks.

Ranb
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/showthread.php?p=250505#post250505

TechnoWeenie · Jul 1, 2010

M1Gunr said:
From NW Firearms thread posted by user RanB:
I am meeting with Representative Haigh about bill 1604 to allow silencer use in WA State. It will take place in her Shelton office on the morning of 19 July or the afternoon of 20 July. I would like to bring another person along as two heads are better than one. Anyone interested? Thanks.

Ranb
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/showthread.php?p=250505#post250505

I'm in... If you can FWD my cell # to him....

amlevin · Jul 1, 2010

gogodawgs said:
The mere posession of a firearm in the bar does not constitute a safety hazard.

Unless the person possessing the firearm does not possess all his faculties at the same time. The problem is NEVER the gun, it is ALWAYS the lack of good sense. The issue with bars is that far too often good sense is subjected to too much alcohol.

Of all the laws on the books in Washington State regulating carry of firearms, I feel that this is one that will remain for a long, long, time. Alowing school ground carry by adults that have lawful business on the premises would be more likely to pass before opening bars to carry.

j2l3 · Jul 1, 2010

I would be interested to know what caused the legislature to enact these prohibitions in the first place. Carry in a bar was legal 30 years ago, what changed?

gogodawgs · Jul 1, 2010

Thomas,

I get that a military installation is different and it is not the type of property we are talking about.

We can talk about more marginalized employers property. A military contractor with thier own property. (i.e. Boeing, a smaller contractor) Although these are a small chunk of employers.

What about a technology company in a single building in a downtown area with a majority of the parking in a parking garage?

Another thing with even the larger company, Boeing, the search should be done at the door of the building. Anywhere I have worked the company has designed the exits in such a way as that all searches take place upon exit and there would never be a need to search a vehicle.

Tomas said:
Mine searched? NO.
Another's searched? YES.

Company property was disappearing, they kept checking stock, when it suddenly went down they searched all employee vehicles in the lot (and found the missing property in a guy's van).

It was company security, not police doing the search, and everyone had agreed, as a condition of employment, to those searches as a part of the hiring process.

(Next time you enter a military establishment note the sign that says you agree to personal and vehicle searches while on the property. Many company lots have that sort of signage, too, just reinforcing / reminding employees what they already agreed to.)

What Washington Gun Laws are Unconstitutional, post McDonald?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

State Researcher

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran