• 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.

Sorry State of Education of Sheriff Deputies

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
Are you taken this to the hierarchy of the department in order to establish if this was a miss-directed statement by two uninformed deputies, or sanctioned policy and beliefs from the top ranks of that department.

Remember who is at the top of that chain. He is the same, if memory serves correct, that told Brewster that his officers acted appropriately in Starbucks.
 

Edgar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
15
Location
roy wa
Tried that

Are you taken this to the hierarchy of the department in order to establish if this was a miss-directed statement by two uninformed deputies, or sanctioned policy and beliefs from the top ranks of that department.



tried to call and talk to the sheriff three times. all three times was given over to his ade's phone and left mesage with ph# and have not gotten a call back.:banghead:
 

Bo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
123
Location
, ,
Some misinformation in this thread.

Many are also transferees from other states where firearms laws are loosely or not at all preempted, such as California. Then there are states such as Illinois that have a sort of "reverse" preemption that specifically allows more, but no less, stringent regulation then at the state level.
Almost all laterals are from in-state. Few from out of state..
Most transferee officers in my experience never take the time to learn Washington laws on the matter and rely on their past knowledge or locker room rumors.
Utter and pure BS! Laterals coming in from out of state are far more conscientious than rookies from the academy in learning our state laws and local ordinances.
Let's not overlook the FTO's that indoctrinate the "new arrivals" into the local "culture". By "culture" I don't mean the best restaurants or clubs, I mean the department "culture" of what they "allow" the citizens in their jurisdiction to get away with.
Really? What secret knowledge of the inner workings of our local departments do you base that ridiculous comment on?
LEOs are allowed to lie to their 'victims/suspects' and because of that they feel entitled to lie whenever they wish in other areas, and feel no compunction to be truthful, even when they are called into court to testify, apparently.​
Oh, good grief. So how many times have YOU been in court and listened to LEOs lying in their sworn testimony? Please document.

Go to a range sometime when there is a group of Police Officers shooting. They don't want to mingle with the "common folk".
Um, perhaps that's simply because they're busy having to qualify? I don't recall having been at any local range with a "group of Police Officers" when other citizens were present; however, I can tell you that if one or two cops are out on a range and citizens are present, they general like to mingle with other shooters ... Please respond and let me know at which range in the greater Puget Sound area you have observed this phenomenom you speak of.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Really? What secret knowledge of the inner workings of our local departments do you base that ridiculous comment on?

Actual conversations with officers who laughed about the practice. Maybe not in YOUR department but several in Snohomish County as well as a couple from No. King County.

Um, perhaps that's simply because they're busy having to qualify? I don't recall having been at any local range with a "group of Police Officers" when other citizens were present; however, I can tell you that if one or two cops are out on a range and citizens are present, they general like to mingle with other shooters ... Please respond and let me know at which range in the greater Puget Sound area you have observed this phenomenom you speak of.

Norpoint and Sams are a couple of those ranges. Was shooting at Norpoint one day and the East bay was full. Two officers were in the center bay and we were all told by the range master that "they didn't want any civilians in with them". They were just playing around with a variety of their personal weapons. This was double irritating because the West bay was reserved for Police Officers only and the windows all taped over with paper so nobody could look in and observe.

Sams has one bay totally reserved for LEO's.

Yes, some are friendly as was the Seattle SWAT Team while they were shooting recently at Kenmore. Yes, they were qualifying but they merely asked the members of the range that were shooting if they wanted to go down range and change targets as they would be shooting continuously for about 20 minutes.

Not so friendly groups I have encountered: Lake Stevens, Lake Forest Park, Snohomish County SO. Most friendly, most Fed's, Tribal Officers, Monroe, and UW PD. These encounters were those "one or two" officers, not qual sessions.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Some misinformation in this thread.


Almost all laterals are from in-state. Few from out of state..

Utter and pure BS! Laterals coming in from out of state are far more conscientious than rookies from the academy in learning our state laws and local ordinances.
Really?

I have a friend who recruits for the academy and most of his recruits are from out of state, and from his home state.

Oh, good grief. So how many times have YOU been in court and listened to LEOs lying in their sworn testimony? Please document.

Lot's. Very few police reports I have read have not had mis-truths, misleading information and out right lies. But again you didn't read and comprehend what he said correctly. Maybe this is the main problem you LEO's need to pay better attention. What he was talking about was you are allowed to LIE in the course of your investigation.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/181241.pdf
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/349169_lying29.html
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/spincontrol/2010/jan/26/wa-lege-how-handle-cops-who-lie/
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003642657_spd30m.html
http://www.popehat.com/2009/02/12/a-rickety-wooden-story/

This was with a quick search, undoubtedly there are much much more.


Um, perhaps that's simply because they're busy having to qualify? I don't recall having been at any local range with a "group of Police Officers" when other citizens were present; however, I can tell you that if one or two cops are out on a range and citizens are present, they general like to mingle with other shooters ... Please respond and let me know at which range in the greater Puget Sound area you have observed this phenomenom you speak of.

At the pit we go too the local SWAT tried to get a group of us to leave, since they were practicing "manuevers", we said no we'll shoot over on this side have fun. One guy was cool enough to come talk to us and let us see them shoot some explosives can't remember the name of the stuff but that was cool. Notice how I highlighted one or two? But Amlevin was talking about a group.

Be more open minded and help the citizens fight against what is a problem, be the better cop, stop defending and help.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
Some misinformation in this thread.

Almost all laterals are from in-state. Few from out of state..

Utter and pure BS! Laterals coming in from out of state are far more conscientious than rookies from the academy in learning our state laws and local ordinances.

While there are indeed quite a few laterals within state, probably the majority as you say, there are still many that come from out of state, and the majority of those that I have spoken to are from California. Washington is a notoriously hard state to get into law enforcement in, as the average applicant to position ratio over the last 15 or so years has been around 2000:1. Its not uncommon for people to apply for LE jobs in states where the ratio is far lower, (such as California, especially in LA) then transfer to a more desirable (less dangerous, better pay, cheaper housing, etc.) state after a few years.

Just because you call BS with an :exclaim: doesn't impress or convince me you have a clue what you're talking about here. The fact remains that out of state transferees from states with dis-similar laws have a lot of things to learn about the laws of our state when they get here. Its not such a hard thing to understand that they are less likely to take the time to focus on those laws that don't have any practical impact on their own daily lives since they are, and have been, immune to most firearm laws. Transferees are also less likely to pay attention those laws that they didn’t really have to focus on the minutia of so much, where in more restrictive states, the equation is commonly broken down to something as simple as - Has Gun = fellow cop or bad guy. The equation is obviously more complicated than that here.

Again, in my now 15 years of experience working around and interacting with federal, state and local LEOs/LEAs, this has been my experience.

Sorry if my experiences don’t fit with yours, but...o well.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
The fact remains that out of state transferees from states with dis-similar laws have a lot of things to learn about the laws of our state when they get here. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```

Sorry if my experiences don’t fit with yours, but...o well.


Especially those who transfer from states where the Local Laws can supersede State Law if it's more stringent. States where preemption is not as absolute or clear as it is in WA.

On the last point it isn't always "experiences" but a matter of viewpoint. Bo see's it from the leo's perspective and the rest of us see it from the "outsiders". Too bad that they are also supposed to see it from our perspective, that is unless they feel they are better than everyone else.
 

Trigger Dr

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
2,760
Location
Wa, ,
Lateral transfers from out of state still have to complete the Wa academy.
Also the "outsiders" should try to see it from the LEO side as well.
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,230
Location
WA
tried to call and talk to the sheriff three times. all three times was given over to his ade's phone and left mesage with ph# and have not gotten a call back.:banghead:

You sure raised some discussion, but back to your situation I hope you remain persistent and get your answers. "The Edger Commission" I like the sound of it.
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,230
Location
WA
SNIP...Perhaps that was true "once upon a time". Over the last couple of decades there has been a definite separation of cultures. Far too many of the "police culture" believe that it is "Us" against "Them" (meaning the rest of society). Listen (and read on various forums) to what they think of people like us who exercise their right to carry a firearm. If they truly were a "subculture" of American Society they would be just as outraged over the denial or infringement on our rights. Most don't care because they have "special protections"...

Yep! I'm aware of the police worldview, been known for some time as you mention, but the subculture I spoke of is modern day scholar thinking. I agree the separation is clear but who's fault? Yes, so many on the forum place blame on the COPS when in fact IMO we the fellow citizen are part of the blame. State and U.S. lawmakers and next door neighbor's are the ones introducing and passing the majority of laws placing LE on the pedestal. The range owner allowing other patrons to be alienated/mal-treated is the problem, so address the owner. "Listen Listen (and read on various forums)" you say! Well who has time for that and why should a small cross section of the police culture, and society as a whole be used to formulate the gospel. I don't know what the figures are or if any exist, and I would guess it low, 1%er's like that of the biker world "small in numbers, compared to the whole, and to base the LE profession on such low percentage of forum posters would be unrealistic.

SNIP...Go to a range sometime when there is a group of Police Officers shooting. They don't want to mingle with the "common folk".

Who cares! Everyone is part of their own culture or subculture and there are people we all desire not to mingle with? One can find there own sand box if need be.
 
Last edited:

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
You sure about that?
Yes, I'm certain. Both fully preempt, but allow cities to locally regulate loaded carry except for those with a CHL.

California's law may seem somewhat confusing, but the law basically says "the legislature occupies the entire field of registration and licensing of firearms". Note, it says "commercial firearms", but that basically means anything manufactured and sold commercially.
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Lateral transfers from out of state still have to complete the Wa academy.
Also the "outsiders" should try to see it from the LEO side as well.

I thought they are people just like us? What is there to see? We want them to do the job as our servants within the prescribed laws that restrict them both morally and constitutionally in the profession they chose to take. No one held a gun to their head and made them take the job. (paraphrased from Bellingham's Deputy Chief Doll)
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
I thought they are people just like us? What is there to see? We want them to do the job as our servants within the prescribed laws that restrict them both morally and constitutionally in the profession they chose to take. No one held a gun to their head and made them take the job. (paraphrased from Bellingham's Deputy Chief Doll)

No gun to the head for sure. It's probably more the starting "wage". Everett PD is currently advertising for an Officer with a starting "salary" of $4792/month and a "bump to over $6,000/mo after one year. Not too bad a starting wage. How many out here live on less? And with no pension to boot? Ditto for uniform allowance?

Wonder if this is a replacement for Troy Meade's position?
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
So what about a firearm you make yourself, from scratch?. As I understand, a person can merely fill out a Form 1 and make their own firearm. What then?

That, I don't know about. Never really looked much into it when I lived there. My guess is that they'd call it a zip gun and say you were breaking hte law.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
You are free to build anything you can legally possess. No permission or forms required. You just can't build it to sell, but you can sell it when you tire of it.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/general.html#gca-manufacturing

Bruce

So how does one cover the "serial number" requirement? Doesn't the GCA 68 require all firearms made after enactment to have a serial number? Thus the Form 1 requirement?

I realize that this is primarily for FFL's but how would one handle the LEO that thinks your brand new, self built rifle/pistol should have a serial number?
 
Last edited:

Trigger Dr

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
2,760
Location
Wa, ,
So how does one cover the "serial number" requirement? Doesn't the GCA 68 require all firearms made after enactment to have a serial number? Thus the Form 1 requirement?

I realize that this is primarily for FFL's but how would one handle the LEO that thinks your brand new, self built rifle/pistol should have a serial number?

Harbor Freight stamp and die set. Your initials and #1
 

bcp

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
126
Location
SW WA
Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal
Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the
firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also,
the firearm must be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully
transferred in the future.
Thanks,
SA Sterling Nixon
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch

From 27 CFR 478.92

...an individual serial number.

The additional information includes:

(A) The model, if such designation has been made;

(B) The caliber or gauge;

(C) Your name (or recognized abbreviation) and also, when applicable, the name of the foreign manufacturer;

(D) In the case of a domestically made firearm, the city and State (or recognized abbreviation thereof) where you as the manufacturer maintain your place of business;

Bruce
 
Last edited:
Top