Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Bill in Seattle will make illegal for DOJ to force police to comply with Constitution

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran Verd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Lampe, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    381

    Bill in Seattle will make illegal for DOJ to force police to comply with Constitution

    Seattle WA police seem to have an ace in the hole in their effort to stop the DOJ from forcing them to stop committing civil rights abuses in the form of a fellow Seattle police officer in the state legislature. That officer has crafted a bill that will make it illegal for the DOJ to force police agencies to comply with the US Constitution. If people doubt this bill will make it far, Washington state has the lowest combined prosecution & conviction rate against bad cops in the nation thanks to state laws especially crafted to make it nearly impossible to convict police officers of misconduct in the course of duty. If this bill passes it could very well be a license for police to commit any abuses they want without repercussion. Rep Mike Hope, currently serving Seattle police officer, and his bill have the backing of the powerful WACOPS lobbying group that leverages combined contributions of all police unions in Washington state. He was briefly suspended from the SPD in 2001 for demanding professional courtesy from officers when his friend was stopped for drunk driving.

    link to the story: http://publicola.com/2012/01/20/legi...keover-of-spd/
    Last edited by Verd; 01-22-2012 at 04:01 AM.
    One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them. Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796.
    If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
    Find businesses that are pro gun and those that aren't. Support Friend or Foe by using it!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    6
    If only we could just outlaw bad cops...

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    A active duty cop is also a legislator? What is wrong with this picture....
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Boy, this is rich.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    It isn't just Seattle like Verd says its state wide, police here don't have any fear of repercussions for their unlawful actions.

    But some of these instances are also contrary to state law the state just ignores parts of the RCW's like this gem in the use of deadly force in RCW 9a.16.040, so when Ian Birk muders a tribal wood carver or Meade decides to kill a drunk driver who couldn't go any where just to "end this" in his words....they are not supposed to be excused but they are.

    Notes:

    Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers." [1986 c 209 § 3.]
    I might just have to make a trip down to Olympia for this hearing and the cool thing is we get to OC into these events in the capitol.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 01-24-2012 at 10:44 AM.
    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)

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    A active duty cop is also a legislator? What is wrong with this picture....
    Why doesn't he just change his name to Dredd and be done with it?
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  7. #7
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    ....

    He didn't violate da law, he is da law!
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  8. #8
    Regular Member Bobarino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295
    Text of the Bill is here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...Bills/2629.pdf

    HOUSE BILL 2629
    _____________________________________________
    State of Washington 62nd Legislature 2012 Regular Session
    By Representative Hope
    Read first time 01/19/12. Referred to Committee on Public Safety &
    Emergency Preparedness.
    1 AN ACT Relating to preventing the adoption by any state or local
    2 law enforcement agency of any federal recommendations regarding use of
    3 force other than those clearly and expressly required or authorized by
    4 an act of congress; adding a new chapter to Title 7 RCW; and creating
    5 a new section.
    6 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
    7 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The legislature finds that use of force
    8 issues are criminal justice and law enforcement matters left to the
    9 states under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and
    10 any use of force policies or practices recommended or imposed by the
    11 federal government, other than those clearly and expressly required or
    12 authorized by an act of congress, are not binding on state and local
    13 government agencies.
    14 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. State or local law enforcement agencies are
    15 prohibited from adopting any federal recommendations or mandates
    16 regarding use of force other than those clearly and expressly required
    17 or authorized by an act of congress.
    p. 1 HB 2629
    1 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. The attorney general shall provide legal
    2 assistance to any state or local law enforcement agency sued by the
    3 federal government for the failure to adopt any use of force policies
    4 or practices recommended or mandated by the federal government, other
    5 than those clearly and expressly required or authorized by an act of
    6 congress.
    7 NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. Sections 2 and 3 of this act constitute a
    8 new chapter in Title 7 RCW.
    --- END ---
    HB 2629



    I'd add my own feelings about this but that would probably get me banned from the board.
    Last edited by Bobarino; 01-25-2012 at 04:46 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Confused

    In the context of an event like Hurricane Katrina this bill would allow use of force by LEO and then give them protection in the event they were subsequently sued. Further, the federal law handed down after Katrina would automatically be challenged by the Washington Attorney General.

    I'm confused and cannot quite understand what he is asking for.

    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  10. #10
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    If this bill passes in WA, I imagine the US DOJ will answer it by pulling ALL Federal funding to ALL Washington LEAs.

    At least in a perfect world, where the government followed rule of law, that is what would happen...

    My guess is, however, knowing what I know about the current leadership of the US DOJ, that they will actually applaud this move, and push OTHER states to disregard Constitutional and Federal Law.

    After all, Mr. Holder seems to think that the Feds aren't bound by the Rule of Law, so why should he thing local LEAs should be?
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by JTHunter View Post
    That's like here in Illinois and 11 other states when it comes to audio-recording cops. In Illinois, you are required to obtain mutual consent from everybody involved.
    If you record police here, it's a FELONY CHARGE that has higher penalties than CHILD MOLESTATION!


    Go figure.
    Second time today I've been tempted to advise you to seek residence elsewhere.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, ,
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Verd View Post
    ...without repercussion.
    No worries. Nature has a way of balancing itself out.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, ,
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    If this bill passes in WA, I imagine the US DOJ will answer it by pulling ALL Federal funding to ALL Washington LEAs.
    But since the DOJ is severely lacking in the "J", and since they work for the communist regime currently in place in Washcington, DC, they'll probably just let it slide...

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Why doesn't he just change his name to Dredd and be done with it?
    Because he is not a judge as well I guess.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  15. #15
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    This is actually a bill before the State legislature...I have alerted my representitive (guy name Kretz, you may have heard of him) and my state senator (Morton) to make sure this goes nowhere. I would repectively suggest you do the same with your rep..
    Last edited by hermannr; 02-11-2012 at 02:52 AM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    A active duty cop is also a legislator? What is wrong with this picture....
    nothing, if you believe in citizen lawmakers, which is what this country was founded on.

    here's a hint. cops are CITIZENS just like NONleos and absolutely have the right to run and participate in public office (off duty)

    freedom matters

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    the DOJ assessment (for loose definition of same) is problematic to say the least. a recent report (not by the DOJ, but referencing actual stats, not subjective analysis that the DOJ has NOT been forthcoming in disclosing), shows that SPD uses physical force, to include deadly force, substantially LESS often than other similarly sized US police agencies, per capita

    those are facts, not opinion. the DOJ report is the latter

    and of course the DOJ couldn't have a POLITICAL agenda in coming to the conclusion they did? oh, of course not. the DOJ would never make do that.

    federalism matters, and the DOJ has a history of wanting to control local PD's via consent decrees, etc. and until the DOJ is forthright in releasing details of their methodology (like a scientific study would do for peer review), their concusions need to be taken with a grain of salt.

    frankly, given that SPD has substantially lower UOF rate than other similarly sized agencies, it strains credibility to believe the DOJ conclusions are based on robust analysis

    one example of their analysis showed they criticized a SPD UOF where officers used a two man swarm vs. a one man swarm. that's a very subjective and problematic metric, but that may be typical of their "methodology"

    regardless, this cop legislator is a citizen legislator JUST like the others in the legislature and he has the same right to write legislation as anybody else.

    (note: in WA state, citizen initiative actually trumps legislatively passed law btw per the state constitution. iow, we are ALL legislators in a sense)

Posting Permissions

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