Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: US Attorney answer finally arrived today

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

    US Attorney answer finally arrived today

    I emailed them in Sept 2008, I got my reply at 10:15am 2/6/2012

    This office is not allowed to provide legal advice or a legal interpretation for private citizens. The King County Bar Association or the UW Law School or Seattle University Law School may be able to assist you.

    Emily Langlie
    Public Affairs Officer
    U.S. Attorney's Office - Western District of Washington

  2. #2
    Regular Member MadHatter66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    320
    At this point I have forgotten what the original question was...

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    That's what they were hoping for.
    "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

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    September 2008? It really took that long to get that answer? What a shame...
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  5. #5
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291
    Quote Originally Posted by MadHatter66 View Post
    At this point I have forgotten what the original question was...
    LOL, that was my response back to them since they didn't include my orig question........

  6. #6
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by M1Gunr View Post
    LOL, that was my response back to them since they didn't include my orig question........
    And your original question was?
    • 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.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Freedom First's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Kennewick, Wa.
    Posts
    850
    "Responsive and transparent..." I love it.
    Freedom can never be lost, only given away by ignorance, by choice, or at the point of a gun. Here in America we can still choose.

    Freedom First 1775

    "I aim to misbehave..." Malcolm Reynolds

  8. #8
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    • 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.

  9. #9
    Regular Member jt59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central South Sound
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by M1Gunr View Post
    I emailed them in Sept 2008, I got my reply at 10:15am 2/6/2012

    This office is not allowed to provide legal advice or a legal interpretation for private citizens. The King County Bar Association or the UW Law School or Seattle University Law School may be able to assist you.

    Emily Langlie
    Public Affairs Officer
    U.S. Attorney's Office - Western District of Washington
    Of course we all understand that they only respond to requests for opinions from legislators and others in official capacity. I can understand why they wouldn't do this.....can you imagine what would happen if they had to respond to individual citizen requests on any points of law? It would take them, like, two years to answer...... oh, wait...it did.
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat....Teddy Roosevelt

  10. #10
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by jt59 View Post
    Of course we all understand that they only respond to requests for opinions from legislators and others in official capacity. I can understand why they wouldn't do this.....can you imagine what would happen if they had to respond to individual citizen requests on any points of law? It would take them, like, two years to answer...... oh, wait...it did.
    Four.

    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom First View Post
    "Responsive and transparent..." I love it.
    Hey, he did get a response and it was perfectly clear. The motto doesn't say a thing about quick.
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    3.5 years for the same response I got when I called them on the phone....lol....

    We elected the attorney general not the "officials" I think they should answer us too.
    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)

  12. #12
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291
    Finally found my question......


    I am requesting guidance concerning information provided in TITLE 18 USC 930 - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in federal facilities and TITLE 39 CFR 232.1 - Conduct on postal property as to persons exempted and possible conflicts within.

    All references to armed persons shall represent persons not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms under federal, state or local laws and who are authorized, licensed or permitted to carry firearms for any lawful purpose in the state of Washington. The scope of this inquiry is not intended to include areas of federal facilities considered sterile; whereupon, weapon screening and armed security or police are provided.

    Specifically, I request the following questions to be addressed:

    Is self-defense considered "other lawful purpose" under 18 USC 930(d)(3)?

    Is the public access area of a postal facility considered a federal facility?

    Would a person exempted under 18 USC 930(d)(3) still be subject to prosecution under 39 CFR 232.1(l)? If so, is the exemption recognized in 18 USC 930(d)(3) rendered inoperable under any other provisions of federal code?

    Under 39 CFR 232.1(l) the only exemption is "except for official purposes". What constitutes "official purposes"? Is the transaction of normal business in the public area of such facility an "official purpose"? If not, would a person licensed or authorized to carry firearms in the course of their business or duties be subject to prosecution if armed while conducting normal business in the public area of such facility if the transaction is not related to their business or duties?

    39 CFR 232.1(l) does not specify buildings but "postal property". Does this prohibit the possession of firearms within the approach, collection or parking areas accessible to the public located outside of the buildings?

    Forty-eight states allow the carrying of concealed firearms for personal protection, thirty-seven of which are "shall-issue" states. Many states do not require licensure to carry firearms for self-defense as long as the firearms are not concealed. Concealed or open, millions of citizens legally carry firearms for personal defense in the normal course of their daily affairs. Clearly, 18 USC 930(d)(3) does provide exemption for "other lawful purposes".

    It is my intention to share the information on these matters with other individuals and groups to educate people exercising this right to defend themselves and their families. Putting into practice a natural right protected by our Constitution should not place any person in fear of arrest or prosecution.

    I trust your opinion will help clarify this matter and provide guidance to prevent well- intentioned persons from becoming entangled in a legal situation that they understood to be constitutionally protected and lawful conduct.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Lammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    3.5 years for the same response I got when I called them on the phone....lol....

    We elected the attorney general not the "officials" I think they should answer us too.
    Not picking on you but I think you are confusing the elected WA AG (and future governor) with the appointed US Attorney. Feel free to correct me if I misunderstand you here.
    IAALBIAAFTDPASNIPHCBCALA
    Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out. (John Corapi, The Black Sheep Dog)
    Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. (Groucho Marx)

  14. #14
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by M1Gunr View Post
    Finally found my question......
    So, they refuse to answer how they will apply the law... /facepalm
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
    I am no victim, just a poor college student who looks to the day where the rich have the living piss taxed out of them.

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Lammo View Post
    Not picking on you but I think you are confusing the elected WA AG (and future governor) with the appointed US Attorney. Feel free to correct me if I misunderstand you here.
    Yep my bad. You are absolutely correct. Gotta go do a Homer "Doh!" now...
    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)

  16. #16
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Yep my bad. You are absolutely correct. Gotta go do a Homer "Doh!" now...
    I loled

    ----> POKE


  17. #17
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Lammo View Post
    the elected WA AG (and future governor)

    Not if the Seattle/King Co libs can help it, and they'll keep counting the votes until it comes out the way they want it to
    "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?"

Posting Permissions

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