Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Bellingham OC Training Bulletin

  1. #1
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Bellingham OC Training Bulletin


  2. #2
    Regular Member Vitaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    593
    direct link not working for me in Chrome

    So they are going to dispatch an officer AND a supervisor to an "open carry incident" sounds like a wonderful use of the Bellingham tax payers money as well as possibly taking possession of the firearm for officer's safety. Yep, that is a load of bollox.
    Last edited by Vitaeus; 02-06-2012 at 03:27 PM.

  3. #3
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitaeus View Post
    direct link not working for me in Chrome
    this works for me in chrome: http://forum.nwcdl.org/index.php?action=downloads;cat=1

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    117
    I've never knew there was such a thing as "...the publicís right to feel safe." Did they just make that up?
    Hoplophobia is a social disease.

  5. #5
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    They did leave out;

    RCW 9.94.043 Deadly weapons -- Possession on premises by person not a prisoner -- Penalty.
    RCW 9.94.049 "Correctional institution" and "state correctional institution" defined.
    RCW 70.108.150 Firearms ó Penalty.
    RCW 70.108.020 Definitions
    • 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.

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    The Bellingham Training Bulletin is a complete load of manure.
    I concur especially since my agreement says it is to be modeled after other training bulletins.
    And they call it a memorandum and not a training bulletin.
    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)

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137

    also posted in BPD draw down on OCer

    SVGs settlement with the BPD required them to
    "The City of Bellingham police department will develop and issue a training bulletin substantially similar to those issued by various other agencies around the state on the topic of open carry of a firearm in Washington State. Such training bulletin will comport with constitutional law, state law, police safety, and police best practices, and will be issued within three (3) weeks of this agreement being fully signed."

    I requested a copy of said document from the Chief of police and received this. It was published on 30 NOV 10, even tho it is not marked as such. It was approved by the city atty and dep chief david dole, even tho it is not marked as such. As of 10 Jan 12, no training has been conducted in reference to this "training bulletin". Bellingham police department policy(and I quote from CoP T Ramsey) "Does not require officers to read the training bulletins."

    Who was and what were the circumstances in the BPD OC encounter the year before SVGs encounter (which was a year before MY encounter, sounds like a pattern)
    Last edited by MSG Laigaie; 02-08-2012 at 01:41 PM.
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie View Post
    SVGs settlement with the BPD required them to
    "The City of Bellingham police department will develop and issue a training bulletin substantially similar to those issued by various other agencies around the state on the topic of open carry of a firearm in Washington State. Such training bulletin will comport with constitutional law, state law, police safety, and police best practices, and will be issued within three (3) weeks of this agreement being fully signed."

    I requested a copy of said document from the Chief of police and received this. It was published on 30 NOV 10, even tho it is not marked as such. It was approved by the city atty and dep chief david dole, even tho it is not marked as such. As of 10 Jan 12, no training has been conducted in reference to this "training bulletin". Bellingham police department policy(and I quote from CoP T Ramsey) "Does not require officers to read the training bulletins."

    Who was and what were the circumstances in the BPD OC encounter the year before SVGs encounter (which was a year before MY encounter, sounds like a pattern)
    My encounter was two years prior, they settled over a year after.

    I have tried to contact the other guy, Gray Peterson had helped him and Uncoolperson some posts on it.

    http://hunting-washington.com/smf/in...c,16470.0.html

    We should try to find those videos John it proves they had no excuse in my incident or yours.
    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)

  9. #9
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie View Post
    SVGs settlement with the BPD required them to
    "The City of Bellingham police department will develop and issue a training bulletin substantially similar to those issued by various other agencies around the state on the topic of open carry of a firearm in Washington State. Such training bulletin will comport with constitutional law, state law, police safety, and police best practices, and will be issued within three (3) weeks of this agreement being fully signed."

    As of 10 Jan 12, no training has been conducted in reference to this "training bulletin".
    Well, the agreement didn't specify that the training bulletin should actually be used to train officers... The settlement agreement wording was almost paranoid enough.

  10. #10
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by John Hardin View Post
    Well, the agreement didn't specify that the training bulletin should actually be used to train officers... The settlement agreement wording was almost paranoid enough.
    Yep but I was under the impression they were mandatory. Who wouldn't think training bulletins are mandatory. So are you saying it should be more "paranoid". Not quite sure what you mean by this?

    Believe me they know it was legal and this officer knew it was legal.
    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)

  11. #11
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Yep but I was under the impression they were mandatory. Who wouldn't think training bulletins are mandatory.
    Isn't "training" the major issue that get's most PD's "tallywhacker in the wringer" when things go wrong?

    Every time they shoot someone, the first thing that the Civil Attorneys point out is improper training. Hell, even the Police Unions point out improper training when they try and defend their officer's jobs when charged with with killing a citizen.

    A Training Bulletin that isn't used for Training is an expensive piece of scratch paper. If soft enough they could use it in the restrooms at the Station and in those cases the user might actually read it before he applies it to his backside.
    "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?"

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Isn't "training" the major issue that get's most PD's "tallywhacker in the wringer" when things go wrong?

    Every time they shoot someone, the first thing that the Civil Attorneys point out is improper training. Hell, even the Police Unions point out improper training when they try and defend their officer's jobs when charged with with killing a citizen.

    A Training Bulletin that isn't used for Training is an expensive piece of scratch paper. If soft enough they could use it in the restrooms at the Station and in those cases the user might actually read it before he applies it to his backside.
    Yea I agree.

    I would like to add though it really doesn't matter whether or not they require officers to read it. The fact that they had to settle and there is no excuse for ignorance because the department made an agreement with me. They were notified, if anything it shows a higher negligence on their part, and they shoulder greater burden for continued actions like this. And it wasn't just me, the city attorney had warned the whole city a year before my incident they cannot harass open carriers. If we can find those videos that are missing in the link I provided it would prove that.
    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)

  13. #13
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    They start out like they are only talking about someone carrying in their hand rather than carrying in a holster,,,but then they don't make any exceptions to a rifle or shotgun, which normally cannot not be carried in a holster, and they do not seem to differentiate later with holsterd handguns either,

    Poorly written...they mush have talked to those guys down in Clark county eh?

    Sounds like they are ripe for another plucking don't you think?

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by hermannr View Post
    They start out like they are only talking about someone carrying in their hand rather than carrying in a holster,,,but then they don't make any exceptions to a rifle or shotgun, which normally cannot not be carried in a holster, and they do not seem to differentiate later with holsterd handguns either,

    Poorly written...they mush have talked to those guys down in Clark county eh?

    Sounds like they are ripe for another plucking don't you think?

    Funny you mention that if we can get those videos one of the council men mentions something about 'what about a man carrying a shotgun squirrel hunting in Elizabeth park.'

    The attorney clearly articulated the law to them, when I ran into this same council men at the courthouse and told him about my illegal detention, he told me he wasn't aware it was legal to Open Carry.


    Yep they are ripe for another plucking they have set themselves up to be royally plucked.
    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)

  15. #15
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    So are you saying it should be more "paranoid". Not quite sure what you mean by this?
    The legal settlement agreement was, in essence, forcing somebody (in this case the Bellingham PD) to do something they don't want to do (i.e. treat lawful open carry as not being a criminal behavior).

    When you are trying to force someone via a legal agreement to do something they don't want to do, "paranoia" is figuring out all the ways they can wiggle out of actually doing what you're trying to force them to do and covering those possibilities in the agreement. Think of a business contract with someone you don't really trust that much, or making a deal with a ten-year-old.

    The assumption that they would actually use the training bulletin you've just forced them to produce to train their officers, while reasonable on its face (why wouldn't they use a training bulletin in training?), was a loophole in the agreement. And apparently it is a loophole they are exploiting to continue with their current practices, obeying the letter of the settlement agreement while thwarting its intent.

    I also would have put in a clause that the complainant's lawyer must review and approve the training bulletin before it is adopted and used in training. The poor quality of the training bulletin could have been predicted.

    If they need spanking, spank them again.
    Last edited by John Hardin; 02-12-2012 at 12:12 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by John Hardin View Post
    The legal settlement agreement was, in essence, forcing somebody (in this case the Bellingham PD) to do something they don't want to do (i.e. treat lawful open carry as not being a criminal behavior).

    When you are trying to force someone via a legal agreement to do something they don't want to do, "paranoia" is figuring out all the ways they can wiggle out of actually doing what you're trying to force them to do and covering those possibilities in the agreement. Think of a business contract with someone you don't really trust that much, or making a deal with a ten-year-old.

    The assumption that they would actually use the training bulletin you've just forced them to produce to train their officers, while reasonable on its face (why wouldn't they use a training bulletin in training?), was a loophole in the agreement. And apparently it is a loophole they are exploiting to continue with their current practices, obeying the letter of the settlement agreement while thwarting its intent.

    I also would have put in a clause that the complainant's lawyer must review and approve the training bulletin before it is adopted and used in training. The poor quality of the training bulletin could have been predicted.

    If they need spanking, spank them again.
    Gotcha thank you for your clarification. I agree.
    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
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Gotcha thank you for your clarification. I agree.
    training bulletins about open carry are rather easy to write. the case law is about as crystal clear as can be

    it does not matter HOW MANY PEOPLE call 911 to complain about the scary man walking down the street with a holstered handgun

    same activity is 100% legally protected behavior and in itself is NOT any indicia whatsoever of unlawful behavior. that some people are alarmed is indisputable. that that alarm is not REASONABLE is also indisputable.

    again, LOTS of agencies make this crystal clear in their training bulletins. this isn't conjecture. i know this from READING them

    heck, i know officers who open carry themselves.

    this reminds me of the pushback we STILL see since the passage of citizen initiative outlawing racial preferences. many cities still do everything they can (and can't) to circumvent the law, because they don't agree with it

    seattle, in regards to carry (not just open carry) actually had their mayor pass (an illegal) "executive order" outlawing guns in city parks. that was promptly spanked down, and they wasted taxpayer money trying to defend it, not to mention printing signs, etc.

    i will make it a point to open carry if i ever go to bellingham.

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    training bulletins about open carry are rather easy to write. the case law is about as crystal clear as can be

    it does not matter HOW MANY PEOPLE call 911 to complain about the scary man walking down the street with a holstered handgun

    same activity is 100% legally protected behavior and in itself is NOT any indicia whatsoever of unlawful behavior. that some people are alarmed is indisputable. that that alarm is not REASONABLE is also indisputable.

    again, LOTS of agencies make this crystal clear in their training bulletins. this isn't conjecture. i know this from READING them

    heck, i know officers who open carry themselves.

    this reminds me of the pushback we STILL see since the passage of citizen initiative outlawing racial preferences. many cities still do everything they can (and can't) to circumvent the law, because they don't agree with it

    seattle, in regards to carry (not just open carry) actually had their mayor pass (an illegal) "executive order" outlawing guns in city parks. that was promptly spanked down, and they wasted taxpayer money trying to defend it, not to mention printing signs, etc.

    i will make it a point to open carry if i ever go to bellingham.
    I Open Carry everywhere I go in Bellingham, B'ham had to settle a potential lawsuit with me they are well aware it's legal. They don't like it and decided to harass someone else.

    We on this site follow those cases very closely. Many of those training bulletins are the result of members of this forum.

    Give me a holler if you are up this way, I'll meet you for coffee or lunch. I usually can find the time.
    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)

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    I Open Carry everywhere I go in Bellingham, B'ham had to settle a potential lawsuit with me they are well aware it's legal. They don't like it and decided to harass someone else.

    We on this site follow those cases very closely. Many of those training bulletins are the result of members of this forum.

    Give me a holler if you are up this way, I'll meet you for coffee or lunch. I usually can find the time.
    y'know, i've never actually been to bellingham, but i will take you up on the offer. from what i understand it sounds like a "hippie haven".

    i've always wondered waht would happen btw, if people OC'd on the campus of Evergreen State College, another hippie haven. that place is such a liberal stronghold i strongly suspect people would call 911 and try to make a huge deal over it.

    this is the place that had mumia abu jamal (obviously not in person) speak at a graduation for pete's sake.

    again, if i ever get bellingham way, ... you can buy me lunch!!
    Last edited by PALO; 02-14-2012 at 06:49 AM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Isn't "training" the major issue that get's most PD's "tallywhacker in the wringer" when things go wrong?

    Every time they shoot someone, the first thing that the Civil Attorneys point out is improper training. Hell, even the Police Unions point out improper training when they try and defend their officer's jobs when charged with with killing a citizen.

    A Training Bulletin that isn't used for Training is an expensive piece of scratch paper. If soft enough they could use it in the restrooms at the Station and in those cases the user might actually read it before he applies it to his backside.
    training is a good issue. GOOD training greatly decreases liability, and frankly - makes for better officers.

    however, one of the things that many agencies are cutting substantially in this economic environment is training.

  21. #21
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    y'know, i've never actually been to bellingham, but i will take you up on the offer. from what i understand it sounds like a "hippie haven".

    i've always wondered waht would happen btw, if people OC'd on the campus of Evergreen State College, another hippie haven. that place is such a liberal stronghold i strongly suspect people would call 911 and try to make a huge deal over it.

    this is the place that had mumia abu jamal (obviously not in person) speak at a graduation for pete's sake.

    again, if i ever get bellingham way, ... you can buy me lunch!!
    I find I rarely have problems with hippies, they get rights. (the psuedo/hippies don't, they have an agenda) The only real problem I have had with OC is with Bellingham PD, but of course they were supposed to be trained and they do know better.

    And I OC pretty much everywhere I go, Banks, Costco, Grocery shopping, even on the motorcycle to pick up kid when he was in middle school.

    I bet you'd like Bellingham, give me holler when you decide to head our way.
    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)

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    Bellingham is a nice quiet town. That is except for the 600 plus gang members in whatcom county. Or the occasional drive by (gang again). Or the physical assault three doors down from my house. Does this affect me, no. Does this concern me?, yes, that is why I am armed.

    "Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?" Bellingham is a great place for anything. I will split the cost of your meal with SVG, come on down. The only people that will harrass you will be the LEOs, but we are working on that.
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

Posting Permissions

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