Vancouver, WA judge carries to court...uses lock box.

BigDave said:

Where in the RCW's or RCW 9.41.300 provide an exception for a Judge, Prosecutor or Attorney for that matter to carry into a court?

Click to expand...

I would look at 9.41.300(9)

Subsection (1)(c) of this section does not apply to any administrator or employee of the facility or to any person who, upon entering the place or facility, directly and promptly proceeds to the administrator of the facility or the administrator's designee and obtains written permission to possess the firearm while on the premises.

Click to expand...

Does one think that the "administrator" would deny permission to the Judge? As for the Prosecutor, they are usually considered to be "Law Enforcement" in many jurisdictions. Regardless, they to would just get permission from the "administrator".

While not specifically named, a Judge and Prosecutor are covered. In the case of the Attorney, if the Judge says OK, who's going to disagree??

Amlevin has it.
The administrator could be, or is, the presiding judge. He/she can set guidelines for the judges.

I believe many here are missing the point, however, for the sake of debating issues that may, or may not have anything to do with this directly, and in the interest of thumping their chests about gun rights for the elitists.

The Judge in this case clearly is reported to have been locking his gun up when he is in court. Period. All this b.s. about packing in the courtroom has nothing to do with the story. Get over it.

Gogodawgs used the opportunity splendidly to promote responsible gun ownership and carrying firearms for personal protection in the reader feedback section of the Vancouver Columbian. BRAVO! His remarks here have a direct connection with the story there. I did a column on it. I thought I made it clear right up front that the judge wasn't packing in the courtroom.

Two paragraphs later, I noted that — depending upon the jurisdiction — judges carry in courtrooms. I didn't mean THIS judge or THIS jurisdiction, though it would be possible for the reasons stated above.

Dave Workman said:

Two paragraphs later, I noted that — depending upon the jurisdiction — judges carry in courtrooms. I didn't mean THIS judge or THIS jurisdiction, though it would be possible for the reasons stated above.

Click to expand...

It only takes the reading of an article like this

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/11/national/main679651.shtml

for some judges to carry into the courtroom. I'm sure that there are more than a few that unlike this Judge, don't rely totally on the Bailiff or Police officers in the Courtroom to defend them.

Amlevin and Workman, One must take a look at this section a little closer (9) is an exception for Sub Section (1)(c) only not the entire code. (1)(c) is dealing with public mental health not the courts nor a Judge or Prosecutor.
The administrator or his designee being addressed here are of those Mental Facilities and again not the courts.

(1)(c) The restricted access areas of a public mental health facility certified by the department of social and health services for inpatient hospital care and state institutions for the care of the mentally ill, excluding those facilities solely for evaluation and treatment. Restricted access areas do not include common areas of egress and ingress open to the general public;

(9) Subsection (1)(c) of this section does not apply to any administrator or employee of the facility or to any person who, upon entering the place or facility, directly and promptly proceeds to the administrator of the facility or the administrator's designee and obtains written permission to possess the firearm while on the premises.

Click to expand...

So we look at RCW 9.41.300 to see if there are exceptions listed for the carry of firearms into the courts and the only exception that is there is (7) Subsection (1)(a), (b), (c), and (e) which deals with Corrections Officers

(7) Subsection (1)(a), (b), (c), and (e) of this section does not apply to correctional personnel or community corrections officers, as long as they are employed as such, who have completed government-sponsored law enforcement firearms training, except that subsection (1)(b) of this section does apply to a correctional employee or community corrections officer who is present at a courthouse building as a party to an action under chapter 10.14, 10.99, or 26.50 RCW, or an action under Title 26 RCW where any party has alleged the existence of domestic violence as defined in RCW 26.50.010.

Click to expand...

So the law states;

RCW9.41.300(1) It is unlawful for any person to enter the following places when he or she knowingly possesses or knowingly has under his or her control a weapon:

(b) Those areas in any building which are used in connection with court proceedings, including courtrooms, jury rooms, judge's chambers, offices and areas used to conduct court business, waiting areas, and corridors adjacent to areas used in connection with court proceedings. The restricted areas do not include common areas of ingress and egress to the building that is used in connection with court proceedings, when it is possible to protect court areas without restricting ingress and egress to the building. The restricted areas shall be the minimum necessary to fulfill the objective of this subsection (1)(b).

There is no exception to carry into a courtroom except for Law Enforcement, Corrections Officers while on duty, No Judge, No Prosecutor.

Dave Workman said:

Amlevin has it.
The administrator could be, or is, the presiding judge. He/she can set guidelines for the judges.
Guidelines, yes, legislate from the Bench, NO! This is under State Preemption as the state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state

I believe many here are missing the point, however, for the sake of debating issues that may, or may not have anything to do with this directly, and in the interest of thumping their chests about gun rights for the elitists. As you thump on your chest

The Judge in this case clearly is reported to have been locking his gun up when he is in court. Period. All this b.s. about packing in the courtroom has nothing to do with the story. Get over it.
My response was in reference to a post made by DCR which he has his right to respond to this or any other thread as I do

Gogodawgs used the opportunity splendidly to promote responsible gun ownership and carrying firearms for personal protection in the reader feedback section of the Vancouver Columbian. BRAVO! His remarks here have a direct connection with the story there. I did a column on it. I thought I made it clear right up front that the judge wasn't packing in the courtroom.
No disagreement here, however some threads take on other aspects, last I looked it did not need your approval to do so.

Two paragraphs later, I noted that — depending upon the jurisdiction — judges carry in courtrooms. I didn't mean THIS judge or THIS jurisdiction, though it would be possible for the reasons stated above.
Sorry Dave, you are mistaken, the portion I believe you are reading as I explained in an earlier post, your reference is to an exception of RCW 9.41.300 that deals with Mental Facilities not the Courts.

Click to expand...

As for the record my view on the issue of the Judge in Vancouver, WA. carrying and checking his firearm when coming into the designated restricted areas as everyone should and as to Nicks response on the Columbian Newspaper were good and supportive of being legally armed.
Then the implication of another Judge and Prosecutor feel they have the authority to carry in these restricted areas is bull and I asked if anyone could show where they legally could and what came was personal attacks and misquotes.

BigDave said:

As for the record my view on the issue of the Judge in Vancouver, WA. carrying and checking his firearm when coming into the designated restricted areas as everyone should and as to Nicks response on the Columbian Newspaper were good and supportive of being legally armed.
Then the implication of another Judge and Prosecutor feel they have the authority to carry in these restricted areas is bull and I asked if anyone could show where they legally could and what came was personal attacks and misquotes.

Click to expand...

Pst, Dave. The Judges wouldn't be legislating from the bench. The State Legislature gave them the authority to make exceptions for "employees" of the Court. If a Judge, Prosecutor, or Attorney, is an "officer of the court" wouldn't that cover them?

amlevin said:

Pst, Dave. The Judges wouldn't be legislating from the bench. The State Legislature gave them the authority to make exceptions for "employees" of the Court. If a Judge, Prosecutor, or Attorney, is an "officer of the court" wouldn't that cover them?

Click to expand...

Where has the State Legislature provided this exception? it is not in RCW9.41.300(9) as that is ONLY referencing RCW 9.41.300(1)(C) dealing with mental health facilities.

(9) Subsection (1)(c) [The restricted access areas of a public mental health facility certified by the department of social and health services for inpatient hospital care and state institutions for the care of the mentally ill, excluding those facilities solely for evaluation and treatment. Restricted access areas do not include common areas of egress and ingress open to the general public;]
of this section does not apply to any administrator or employee of the facility or to any person who, upon entering the place or facility, directly and promptly proceeds to the administrator of the facility or the administrator's designee and obtains written permission to possess the firearm while on the premises.

Mike I do not know if you are reading into this as applying for any administrator or designee but I feel it is not at all, otherwise we would have restrictions all over the cities and counties other then provided for in 9.41.300

NavyLCDR said:

I'm voting with Dave on this one.... and it's really hard for me to say that! :lol:

Click to expand...

(Quickly runs to the window looking for flying pigs)

NavyLCDR said:

I'm voting with Dave on this one.... and it's really hard for me to say that! :lol:

Click to expand...

Actually I do also. I used the wrong cite. In my haste I read too many lines down. There is a blanket exemption in RCW 9.41.300 for Law Officers unless they are actual parties to certain actions.

Again, one might make the stretch that Prosecutors, who are considered the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of a County (depending on the laws of the State) and the Judge, who runs his Court Room, could carry a firearm. With the Judge, who knows what he/she actually wears under that robe