The Columbian - Prosecutor mulls case of man accused of scary carry statute violation

[joeroket]

imported post

Marty Hayes wrote:

Joe, at least you tried.  I wish you would have followed up with simply "is openly carrying a handgun legal in Washington?" 

I did follow up with Mike but I am of the opinion that this is one can he did not want to have open and would rather let the law be just the way it is because it does actually work fairly well for how vague it is.

I will contact Mike again after the special session and see if maybe I can get him to ask a more straight forward way that cannot be paraphrased because of the recent cases that have actually wasted tax payer dollars. I think we have 2 arrests, both cite and release, that have been either dropped or dismissed, or am I wrong?

 

[joeroket]

imported post

NavyLT wrote:

Marty Hayes wro

The open carry movement has been an "in-your-face" movement, both here and other places.

Yep, that's us.  In-your-face.  Sure.

NavyLT, with all due respect you know as well as I that there are people that have the "in your face" attitude about open carry. I don't think Marty is picking out individuals but rather making the statement that there are these types.

 

[Marty Hayes]

imported post

joeroket wrote:

I did follow up with Mike but I am of the opinion that this is one can he did not want to have open and would rather let the law be just the way it is because it does actually work fairly well for how vague it is.

I will contact Mike again after the special session and see if maybe I can get him to ask a more straight forward way that cannot be paraphrased because of the recent cases that have actually wasted tax payer dollars. I think we have 2 arrests, both cite and release, that have been either dropped or dismissed, or am I wrong?

Not sure how good the vagueness is working for Mr. Kirby right now.

 

[joeroket]

imported post

Marty Hayes wrote:

joeroket wrote:

I did follow up with Mike but I am of the opinion that this is one can he did not want to have open and would rather let the law be just the way it is because it does actually work fairly well for how vague it is.

I will contact Mike again after the special session and see if maybe I can get him to ask a more straight forward way that cannot be paraphrased because of the recent cases that have actually wasted tax payer dollars. I think we have 2 arrests, both cite and release, that have been either dropped or dismissed, or am I wrong?

Not sure how good the vagueness is working for Mr. Kirby right now.

True, but if the witness accounts are correct then I believe he may have violated the law. I am holding my opinion until he has had the chance to face his accusers.

 

[Hendo]

imported post

NavyLT wrote:

Marty Hayes wrote:

NavyLT wrote:

Marty Hayes wrote:

Sorry, you don't get to pick the test cases. If Kirby looses at trial, it empowers the police to continue. Don't think VPD will share their success with the other agencies? All of a sudden, training memos are reversed based on the success of State v. Kirby. It it is appealed and he looses, you guys are sunk.

What I don't understand, is the three pages of "this is outrageous" posts, followed up by, "er, no, we won't get involved until after he looses his trial." The time to get involved is now.

HIS lawyer has specifically asked us to not get involved. HIS lawyer has even gone so far as to ask us not to show up at the trial.

Given the fact that you feel the way you do, I can hardly blame him.

If you don't like us, you can go away.

NavyLT, I believe Marty has earned "...a place at this debate..." as well -and a lot more respect than what you have given.I'm not sure if you know Marty's background - consider his experience and from where he speaks.

Marty - I appreciate your perspective and advice. I believe you offer a balancing viewpoint. Keep it coming.

 

[Machoduck]

imported post

Marty Hayes said: ""MD:

Your points are valid, and I certainly do not absolve the police of anything. But, as my date of joining this forum indicates, I have been here for a year and a half, and in that year and a half I have not seen the effort which I allude to, just individual stories about good people being harrassed. Taking this route, the open carry movement will never manage to educate the thousands of officers here in WA state, employed by the hundreds of agencies.

But, a top-down education will result in that goal, much sooner than any other means. Or, is the real goal to be able to claim rightious indignation each and everytime someone is wrongfully affronted?

Lastly, by forcing the issue as is being done, the result MIGHT JUST BE an interpretation by a court that openly carrying a handgun, in a holster, in an urban area is a violation of law, because that act has never been conclusively ruled upon by an appellate court, in a published opinion, setting the case law precedent.

But, you'all continue to do whatyou want. I was just making a suggestion."

It would be helpful if I knew which post of mine you were referring to. You say it was a year ago? You act as if your method is the only method and that all others are, by definition, invalid. You say we should get the AG's opinion but we were told he will provide opinions only to politicians.

I think that you have presented a case for your not being one of us. You appear not to believe in open carry and you seem to think we're all attention seekers looking for trouble. If that's not true, I apologize, but it sure sounded that way to me. You talk of us as a group separate from yourself. With all that, I presume that you're not one of us. We all have to live together and when we join with others to make laws it doesn't always go as planned, either as to method or to outcome but we all have to obey the resulting law. I'm not experienced in the ways of legislation and of courts, particularly courts of appeal. I would like to do more but I won't follow the lead of someone who talks down to me and to people I respect.

MD

 

[Ajetpilot]

imported post

Marty Hayes wrote:

And, while I don't practice open carry myself, I agree with the right. I'll pledge the first $50.

Marty

Marty, I'm one of the biggest supporters of you and FAS. However, you did imply that you separate yourself from our group by saying things like, "You guys have your test case, I hope it works out well for you."

On the other hand, you are the only one who has made a financial pledge for his defense. That is something even I haven't done... yet.

 

[heresolong]

imported post

Marty Hayes wrote:

NavyLT wrote:

HIS lawyer has specifically asked us to not get involved. HIS lawyer has even gone so far as to ask us not to show up at the trial.

Given the fact that you feel the way you do, I can hardly blame him.

Actually Marty, the lawyer requested that we not get involved before there had even been much discussion. The early posts on this issue suggested a picnic or get together in Vancouver that weekend, at which point the lawyer jumped on board and asked that we refrain. So the current discussion about the merits of Kirby's trial have nothing to do with that.

As far as financial support, I think it would be worthwhile to save this issue until the appeals process. We can certainly let his lawyer know that there are people willing to help out, but I for one would be interested in seeing how this plays out at the city level. I don't think it would be helpful to throw money at a case if, in fact, he was acting weird and jumping around with his hand on his gun. Good chance that the case would be lost and set a stricter negative precedent.

I would much rather put money into a case where someone was acting perfectly normally and was arrested for that. For example SVG who wasn't charged but was treated very poorly by the Bellingham PD. If he had been charged this would have been the perfect test case since he was doing nothing but walk down the sidewalk with a cup of coffee in the middle of the afternoon. Kirby still remains a bit of an unknown pending discovery and trial.

 

[MrGray]

imported post

NavyLT wrote:

Marty Hayes wro

The open carry movement has been an "in-your-face" movement, both here and other places.

Yep, that's us.  In-your-face.  Sure.

You do know who Marty Hayes is, right?

If not, I'd suggest that you go and educate yourself.

Then consider whether you still think he's a troll.

 

[Marty Hayes]

imported post

Okay guys, here is a global post. I am heading out of town tomorrow to spend 10 days helping in a self-defense trial, so don't have time to answer each of you, then counter answer, etc.

One, I do not carry openly, but I believe in the right. So, when I say "you guys" I mean you guys that practice open carry. I don't carry openly because I believe it gives up a huge tactical advantage, that advantage being of surprise. But that is another debate.

I offered to help financially, because State v. Kirby IS the case which is currently being tried, not some "perfect" case somewhere down the line. If this case goes to trial, and is subsequently appealed by either side, then it will establish the caselaw regarding open carry. It may not be perfect, but it is THE case that may make up the rules of the road. I would think that the open carry crowd would like a place at that table, if nothing more, making sure there is plenty of money for Mr. Dumm, (whom I have spoken with about this case, BTW) to do his best job, both at trial, and then at appeal, (if it goes that far).

$20 - $100a piece from everyone in the open carry movement here in WA will go a long ways towards helping make sure the case goes the way we want it to go. Isn't it worth that to you guys to give Mr. Kirby the best shot at acquittal? It is much easier to affirm an acquittal at appeal, than to overturn a conviction. Much easier.

As far as an AG opinion, any state legislator or county prosecutor can ask for, (and by law, must recieve) an opinion from the AG regarding a particular legal topic. Each person reading this has at least two state reps, one state senator and one county prosecuting attorney they can inquire with, as to them requesting an opinion from the AG regarding the legalities of open carry. I would rather have a pro-gun AG give a formal opinion, than the WA Supreme Court. While an AG opinion doesn't carry legal weight in court, it is highly regarded, and most county prosecutors would follow that opinion.

BTW, I have little regard for witness statements elicted from police who want to prove a case. Witnesses are routinely "coached" to say what the police want them to say. In fact, in the trial I amgoing to participate in, the witnesses said one thing at the first trial, (hung jury, this is the re-trial) and said a different thing in the deposition for the civil suit against the defendant. Take both extremes, and the truth is often times somewhere in the middle.

Gotta go and do stuff.

Marty

 

[Ajetpilot]

imported post

Thanks, Marty. Good info. Best of luck in the SD case.

 

[olypendrew]

imported post

If he is acquitted, I doubt the city would waste resources on an appeal, when it could not re-try the individual, due to double jeopardy. The issue would effectively be moot.

 

[heresolong]

imported post

NavyLT wrote:

MrGray wrote:

You do know who Marty Hayes is, right?

If not, I'd suggest that you go and educate yourself.

Then consider whether you still think he's a troll.

I only know him as a person who makes claims the same as the Brady Bunch and the concealed carry only crowd.

Marty Hayes, President of the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network

http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/

 

[gogodawgs]

imported post

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/

 

[Tomas]

imported post

NavyLT wrote:

MrGray wrote:

NavyLT wrote:

Marty Hayes wro

The open carry movement has been an "in-your-face" movement, both here and other places.

Yep, that's us. In-your-face. Sure.

You do know who Marty Hayes is, right?

If not, I'd suggest that you go and educate yourself.

Then consider whether you still think he's a troll.

I only know him as a person who makes claims the same as the Brady Bunch and the concealed carry only crowd.

Marty carries a lot more weight, with a lot more people, for a lot more years, than someone who calls him a troll simply because they disagree. For folks propounding freedoms and rights I would expect a lot more open-mindedness...

Quite honestly, if this is how the general populace of this forum handles minor differences, with name calling and ad hominum attacks, instead of logically and rationally presenting their opposing view for consideration, and acceptances of differences, there is little reason for me to remain here.

In 63+ years I've never been one to just accept being required to be in lock-step with others. I'm not that much of a "follower."

(Yeah, I know, it's a damned n00b [me] saying something so who cares? If a n00b leaves it doesn't even make a ripple in the pond.) http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_user.php?id=52236&posts=1

Anyway, I'm definitely watching to see how this plays out.

 

[XD45PlusP]

imported post

Tomas,

It seems that some people have a God Complex who post here, as if they are the only ones who are right and when you disagree with them, they attack you or call you names, like Troll, etc....

XD

 

[Bill Starks]

imported post

....

....

 

[MrGray]

imported post

NavyLT wrote:

 Now, try to dissuade me that the only thing keeping some of us from calling "troll" is the name associated with these posts.  If the name Marty Hays was not associated with the comments above, what would you think?

Look, it's like this.

Lots of people know Marty Hayes. He's an eminent firearms instructor. He's studied law, specifically so that he can understand and teach the law that applies to self defense and firearms carry. Many, many people know Marty the same way I do - Marty (and the staff at his school, FAS) taught us to draw, shoot on the move, clear malfunctions, reload, engage with moving targets, perform disarms and fend off disarm attempts, and a host of other skills that together make up armed self-defense. At the same time he was teaching us those things, he was teaching us the nuances of the laws surrounding use of lethal force in self defense.

I've reached that stage in life where it's rare that people impress me. Marty is one of the rare few who still impresses me. When Marty talks, I will listen, even if (and perhaps especially if) I disagree with what he's saying. Marty has my respect because he's amply demonstrated that he more than deserves it.

I respectfully suggest that you might profit by carefully listening to what Marty says, too. I'm not saying he's always right; no one ever is. I *am* saying that when you find yourself disagreeing with him, it will be worth your while to sit down, make sure you understand his argument, and then carefully reassess your disagreement to make sure you're not missing something.

And if you have not taken classes at FAS, I highly recommend that you go and sign up, right now. If you regularly open carry, I'm going to break with tradition and suggest you take the handgun retention/disarm class, which I took and found to be eye opening.

 

[Machoduck]

imported post

I don't know Marty Hayes; never met the man. He seems to have a fine reputation. Nevertheless, coming onto the forum and talking down to everyone was not a smooth move. Everyone has bad days. Let Hayes take responsibility for them. In my judgment he came close to troll like behavior. If I think he was close to the line, I can see where NavyLT could say he crossed it. Calling Hayes on his posting was appropriate.

MD

 

[Bill Starks]

imported post

Where is the update to this case? Wasn't the hearing on the 1st of April? There are three threads running on this issue and not one has an update as to what happened.

While Mr. Kirby may be the one in the spotlight right now, this is a case that affects every gun carrier in Washington State. This isn't just about Open Carry this affects those who Concealed Carrier as well. What if in the near future a CC'er has his jacket or vest blow open while reaching for his wallet and someone is "alarmed?"

If you're gonna keep us out of the courthouse, give us the courtesy of updates.