Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: Pierce County District Court 2nd Amendment Violation? Komo Problem Solvers

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, WA 98439
    Posts
    51

    Pierce County District Court 2nd Amendment Violation? Komo Problem Solvers

    Recently hit up Pierce County District Court on 96th in Tacoma and they have yet to install security lock boxes for licensed gun holders/open carriers. I have since contacted Komo News and they have replied and would like a statement and some follow up information.

    Here's hoping they can get something done!

  2. #2
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    Did they have someone to act as a custodian of weapons? If so then they are in compliance with state law as stated in RCW 9.41.300.
    I see you said no lockboxes at that location but that is only one solution the state has given.
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, WA 98439
    Posts
    51
    No place or person to handle safe keep of Firearms

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762
    This has been a problem since at least 2002. See this thread.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762
    Also, while clearly a 2nd Amendment violation, it should not be played as such. It should be played as a state law violation, because it will theoretically be simpler to get satisfaction at the state law level.

  6. #6
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post
    Also, while clearly a 2nd Amendment violation, it should not be played as such. It should be played as a state law violation, because it will theoretically be simpler to get satisfaction at the state law level.
    That is probably a very accurate statement. Make sure they get the correct RCW. By the way, what did they say when you went in there?
    Last edited by decklin; 09-16-2011 at 08:59 PM.
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, WA 98439
    Posts
    51
    I am playing it as a state law violation not a 2nd amendment violation. The guards exact words were mumbled but I clearly heard something to the fact that they know about it and don't plan on fixing the problems.

    I actually read the previous thread on the subject and which was the clinching factor in making my contact with the news.

  8. #8
    Regular Member tombrewster421's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Roy, WA
    Posts
    1,329
    Pierce County has some major issues. They definitely need an attitude adjustment at many levels.
    Guns don't kill people, bullets do!

  9. #9
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Has anyone even addressed this to the Pierce County Commissioners?
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  10. #10
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Another case of a Law without penalty for breaking it.

    Recent comment from a Judge in an unrelated case (the Teacher's Strike in Tacoma) indicated what the problem is in many of these cases. He said "The law may say that strikes by public employees are illegal but it doesn't provide for any penalty".

    And there you have it. The law may require lock boxes or "custody officers" but what are you going to do if the agency refuses. What's the penalty. Public Scorn? Laws like these need some teeth. Something to bite those in the ass that choose to ignore and violate them.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  11. #11
    Regular Member Vitaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    593
    Florida added penalties to their pre-emption statute, sounds like we may need to start a similar campaign here.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Tacoma, Wa
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Another case of a Law without penalty for breaking it.

    Laws like these need some teeth. Something to bite those in the ass that choose to ignore and violate them.
    +1
    This is exactly what I was thinking. If there's no repercussion, there will be no compliance

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762
    Florida added penalties to their pre-emption statute, sounds like we may need to start a similar campaign here.
    Violation of any provision of RCW Title 9.41 is a misdemeanor. This includes preemption and the court storage provisions.

    The problem is one of enforcement.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Winlock, , USA
    Posts
    501
    plus, since they know the law, they have no protection from law suits...

    I'd think about suing the county commisioners if'n I was an offended party

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    766
    There's a way to remedy this. A citizen can file an application for a writ of mandamus, which is an order for a government official to carry out their job. If the person who is the subject of the order refuses to carry out the order, then that person can be held in contempt-of-court and can be fined or imprisoned.

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by 44Brent View Post
    There's a way to remedy this. A citizen can file an application for a writ of mandamus, which is an order for a government official to carry out their job. If the person who is the subject of the order refuses to carry out the order, then that person can be held in contempt-of-court and can be fined or imprisoned.
    Yes but finding a lawyer who is willing to do so, and covering the expense. I have been working on Whatcom County for a while now. The other thing to do is get an AG opinion on it. Like DeanF said it's enforcement issue, funny how Law Enforcement, choose which laws they will enforce.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    I wonder, do police officers who visit that courthouse go there unarmed, or do they have a weapon check area? The state constitution prohibits special privileges for a single class of citizens, wouldn't it follow that you can check your weapon wherever the police do, when they go to that courthouse to testify?

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762
    The state constitution prohibits special privileges for a single class of citizens, wouldn't it follow that you can check your weapon wherever the police do
    Police officers are not there as citizens. They are there as agents of the state, and thus should be afforded fewer privileges.

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post
    Police officers are not there as citizens. They are there as agents of the state, and thus should be afforded fewer privileges.
    +1 and QFT!
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member Just Us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    248
    This location knows about it as I have asked multiple times. They have also stated that the location was going to be out of use soon. Still they have put anything in place.

    The downtown Tacoma has lock boxes that I have used in late July.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Recent comment from a Judge in an unrelated case (the Teacher's Strike in Tacoma) indicated what the problem is in many of these cases. He said "The law may say that strikes by public employees are illegal but it doesn't provide for any penalty".
    In such a case, wouldn't it be fair to say they quit their jobs? No call no show, and all that. If they cannot strike, and they simply walk out and don't come back, well, they left the job, right?

  22. #22
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Difdi View Post
    In such a case, wouldn't it be fair to say they quit their jobs? No call no show, and all that. If they cannot strike, and they simply walk out and don't come back, well, they left the job, right?
    My point was that many laws don't seem to have any real penalty for violation, especially any that affect Public Employees. Break the law and so what.

    You're right that the teachers should be handled just like Reagan handled the ATC's. As for the other employees that fail to follow laws such as the one that requires either a lock box or designated party to receive firearms in Courthouses, they seem to get a pass. Nobody in power wants to prosecute.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  23. #23
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Another case of a Law without penalty for breaking it.

    Recent comment from a Judge in an unrelated case (the Teacher's Strike in Tacoma) indicated what the problem is in many of these cases. He said "The law may say that strikes by public employees are illegal but it doesn't provide for any penalty".

    And there you have it. The law may require lock boxes or "custody officers" but what are you going to do if the agency refuses. What's the penalty. Public Scorn? Laws like these need some teeth. Something to bite those in the ass that choose to ignore and violate them.
    I once read that legislator’s device and pass laws with three purposes in mind, and one of those was: "expectation that the law won' be enforced but a standard of behavior is expected"

    I guess we are seeing the expected behavior side, of which won’t be enforced. “Law’s that place a value on behavior without expecting enforcement” Guidelines, we expect these agency’s will behave and implement the RCW, but we aren’t going to enforce this guideline!

    That’s the bottom line crap we’re seeing.

  24. #24
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291
    If I remember correctly someone here knew former Chief Justice Sanders. I wonder if he would be willing to take on cases like this?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    This seems to be a topic that keeps coming up over and over again and we talk it to death over and over again. How about we get together chip in some money pick a case that is winnable and file a writ of mandamas based on violating RCW 9.41.300, I am tired of talking about it, heck I am tired of reading about it. All we have to do is win one case or lose a case and we would know exacctly where we stand. I am good for the 1st $100 he said putting his money where his mouth is.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •