• 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.

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

Verd

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
381
Location
Lampe, Missouri, United States
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/legislator-tries-to-block-doj-takeover-of-spd/
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
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:

Bobarino

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
295
Location
Puyallup, Washington, USA
Text of the Bill is here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2011-12/Pdf/Bills/House 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:

Whitney

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
435
Location
Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
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
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
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?
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
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.
 

jsimmons

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
181
Location
San Antonio, ,
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...
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
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:

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
A active duty cop is also a legislator? What is wrong with this picture....:banghead:

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
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
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)
 
Top