Thread: Read this! Silencer rights imposed!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Ranb

I received a reply from Deputy Haley. He is standing by his actions, but refuses to comment on an ongoing case.

I asked his permission to post his replies to me on this forum, but until then I can ony say that it seems that someone told him the silencers were being used or he witnessed something else not revealed in the original post.

Ranb

I can't believe the OP still hasn't asked for this thread to be yanked.

@ Ranb - Did the OP ask you to interfere on his behalf?

I hope this doesn't screw up his case!

Originally Posted by Ranb

I received a reply from Deputy Haley. He is standing by his actions, but refuses to comment on an ongoing case.

I asked his permission to post his replies to me on this forum, but until then I can ony say that it seems that someone told him the silencers were being used or he witnessed something else not revealed in the original post.

Ranb

Neither of us remember exactly what the words were when the officer first approached us. How I remembered it he first asked who 'was shooting silencers', to which no one replied. Then he said 'okay, I'll ask another question...who HAS silencers' and we both replied honestly. I brought that up to my friend as well but he was convinced that they were not under the impression we had been shooting them because they never made mention of it. I even tried to explain that we had not shot them and therefore not broken any laws, and thats about when he started telling us that it was a felony blah blah blah.

I tried calling and emailing Haley and when I finally got ahold of him he would not discuss the case and merely said the silencers were in evidence and that the prosocutor would have to give them back.

His sargent also made no mention of this either so although until and if they charge us, we won't know what they think I guess.

All I can say is I argued the point that they had not been shot. Haley did not say anything about us having shot them. In fact, it was when I told him that it was only breaking the law if we shoot them in the state, that he shook his head and began with the felony for posessing them. I honestly believe it was the first time he had ever heard about it being against the law to shoot them.

Either way, everything I know has been put out there. I really wish he would say exactly what they have been doing the past week with my property if the case hasn't even been sent to the prosecutors office yet? Are they still trying to figure out how bad it will make them look when they are told to give them back by the countys prosecutor?

All I can do is ponder.

No other news. I think I mentioned I had someone speak with the prosecutors office and they seemed to have a good understanding of the language used in the RCW but that the case had not yet been sent to their office. He reassured me they would be returned, may just take a little time. Either way I am going to talk with some family friends who work within various political groups in WA and find out what if anything I (and anyone else willing) can do to get something on paper and in the publics eye.

Originally Posted by Bhowe

Hello,

Today myself and a few friends decided to go out shooting. They know a place in Sultan WA that is legal to shoot at and off we went. Long story short, there were a few other people leaving as we arrived and they wanted to chit chat. We got to showing firearms to one another and some silencers we had with us at the time.

They were unaware of the legalities of silencer ownership and were under the impression they were completely illegal to own. We showed him copies of form 4's with the $200 tax stamp fully registered to each of us. We eventually wrapped up the conversation and they left.

Not ten minutes later, two Snohomish County Sheriffs deputies showed up with their lights on and instructed us all to the front of our vehicles, hands out of our pockets etc. Then they wanted to know who had the silencers. We said we did but explained they were legally owned, and no one had been shooting them (or even had them on guns).

They had us retrieve them from our bags and I also gave him the copy of my form 4. He stopped me and said "what is that?" so I told him and he said "that piece of paper doesn't mean anything to me, that only means the Feds can't come after you, but we still can." word for word.

He then told us we were lucky we were not being dragged out in cuffs. I tried to ask why but he looked like he was going to taze me or something so I backed down, not wanting to argue with someone who is already itching to arrest someone. They instructed us that it was a "class C felony" to posess a silencer in Washington State, even an FFL holder (which is something he just brought up out of the blue). They took them and said they would be forwarding it to the prosecutor who would do the actual filing of charges. Then they left and we continued shooting without incident.

Can anyone help!?!

If it is a felony, why weren't we dragged out in cuffs?
If it is a felony, why can I purchase one from an FFL dealer, and the DEALER isn't in trouble for selling it to me?

I am frustrated and confused.

Please help!

You use the word "impose". I don't think it means what you think it does.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/imposed

I really don't know how to look at this. Part of me says never to move without an attorney if you are dealing with the police. The other part tells me this is so clear cut that why should you need an attorney.

Either way, be very careful what you say in public.

Possibilities.
1. Original witnesses exaggerated and claimed you shot with the silencers. My reaction, if this is the case sue the backside off them for the stress, loss of community standing and any financial loss involved.
2. Police officer "assumed" you shot with the silencers. At least an abject personal apology from the deputy and the PD.
3. Police officer did not know what he is talking about and finally admits he made a mistake. Ditto.
4. Police officer lies but it looks as though he has never claimed that he witnessed you firing through a suppressor. No case without a witness.
5. Original witnesses lie to protect themselves. You word against theirs. Still no LE witness and probably no case.

Why don't you contact Dave Workman, who is very active in WA firearm politics, and chat with him about this?

We know that certain WA PD's possess and use suppressors, perhaps, if you are actually charged with an offense, this is the time for an attorney to drag out all of the States dirty secrets. LE enforces one law for the citizens and ignores the same law themselves.

What it hasn't been sent to the DAs office?

There's a little thing called the bill of rights? 6th Amendment? Right to a speedy trial?

If they haven't even brought it to the DA I would have my lawyer contact them and say they're violoating your right to a speedy trial and illegally seized your property (4th amendment)

How far do they need to push you?

Originally Posted by ORBrit

@ Ranb - Did the OP ask you to interfere on his behalf?

I hope this doesn't screw up his case!

No he did not. I asked the Snohomish County sheriff a few questions about silencers and their attitude about them. As they do not discuss pending cases, and I am not a witness, there is nothing I can do to interfere in anything.

Clearly Deputy Haley's version of events is much different than Bhowe's. If Bhowe's version of events is accurate, then I can not see this ending well for the police as their behavior would then border on corruption in my opinion. I am still perplexed as to why the police felt strongly enough to confiscate the silencers but not arrest the alleged "perpetrator". Something stinks here.

That said, there is nothing ever to be gained by telling the police anything other than your identity when they talk to you, especially in the circumstance like the one Bhowe described in his original post.

Here is an excellent video on why a person should never submit to questioning by the police. It demonstrates why it can never do any good for the person being questioned. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...33318153586646 This video is well worth watching and even includes a rebuttal by a police officer who is also a law student.

In my humble opinion, Bhowe needs to retain a lawyer and cease to discuss this case at all. Nothing he says on a public forum or to the police can do any good for him at all. Even if he is absolved of any wrong doing, he may have to fight to get his property back. It is best to wait until after the DA is done with the case to comment on it.

Ranb

Bhowe, I am in Monroe right now for a gun show. If you are going to the WAC show, you are welcome to come by my table (it is full of silencers, AOWs, SBRs, and Machine guns) and chat about it.

Where is the Snoho sheriff's office in relation to Monroe? I don't know the area well.

I have a banner draped on the front of one of my tables that looks like this:www.OrtweinIntl.com

I was planning on going but we are getting ready to move the fam and myself just down the street a few blocks. I am going to check out the emails Haley sent to Ranb and see if they can be posted on here, so we all have a clear understanding of both sides.

Not sure where the Snoho sheriff is but Haley's cop shop is the Sultan PD which is ten minutes east roughly on highway 2.

Originally Posted by Bhowe

Not sure where the Snoho sheriff is but Haley's cop shop is the Sultan PD which is ten minutes east roughly on highway 2.

Didn't Snoho take the can? Or was it Sultan PD?

I hope you can break free to come by the show.

Here are the messages I exchanged with Deputy Haley. I have his and Bohwe's permission to post them here. I edited my name for posting the e-mails here.

Sheriff Lovick,

I read a claim by one of your residents that some legally registered silencers were confiscated on 2 Feb 2010. The owner of the silencers claimed he showed proof of registration to Deputy Haley but that this proof of legal ownership was disregarded and the silencers confiscated after the deputy claimed silencer possession was a class C felony. The owner claimed he had not been using them which would have been a gross misdemeanor per RCW 9.41.250 (1)(c).

I have a few questions. Are the Snohomish county police allowed to confiscate legally owned silencers even when there is no evidence of any law being broken? Are there any Snohomish county laws that ban silencer possession? Since Washington State law bans silencer use, but does not ban possession or even recognize them as firearms, why should silencers be confiscated in Snohomish County for mere possession?

Thank you for your time.

Respectfully,
Ran B


Friday, February 12, 2010 12:55 PM

Mr. B.
I can't comment on an ongoing case. The subjects involved and anyone else has the right to say whatever they want. Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

If your child said they didn't ride their bicycle through the house, but you saw muddy bicycle tire prints on the livingroom carpet, what would you think? What if you neighbor said they saw them do it through your livingroom window?

If the prosecutor or court disagrees with my actions, the suppressors will be returned to their rightful owners. If you have any other questions that I can answer under the rules I must follow, I will be happy to do so.

DEPUTY STEVE HALEY


Friday, February 12, 2010 2:51 PM

Deputy Haley,

Thank you for your reply. I understand that everything I read on the internet has to be taken with a grain of salt, that is why I made no assumptions and asked questions instead. While I also did not think you would comment on any ongoing case, I was hoping that you would have given direct answers to my questions.

Is it department policy to confiscate legally owned silencers in Snohomish County if they are not observed being used by the police?

Are there any Snohomish County laws banning silencer possession?

I am discussing this on the web forum I linked to in my first letter. Do you have any objection to my posting your replies on the forum? Thank you.

Ran B


Friday, February 12, 2010 4:35 PM
Mr. B,
You can post these if you want.

1. We have no specific policy on suppressors that I am aware of. Generally speaking we take items we believe to be illegal or evidence of a crime into custody until the case is resolved. Like I said, if the prosecutor disagrees with the deputy that an item taken into custody is evidence of a crime, or if the prosecutor does not believe a crime occurred, or if the prosecutor decides not to go forward with charging, or if the court were to find the defendants not guilty of a crime, some evidence items are then returned to the rightful owners. Obviously some items such as drugs or explosives (not applicable in this instance) would not be returned regardless.

2. I am not aware of any Snohomish County law banning silencer possession.

I hope this answers your questions.

DEPUTY STEVE HALEY

Ranb

You should give them a link to this thread.

"if your child says they didn't ride their bike through the house, but you see muddy tire tracks"

...Must be guilty! I hope that is his defense if this makes it to court.

What a tool. Notice he never made mention of HIM witnessing anyone shoot a silencer. Only hinted to someone perhaps witnessing (or claiming to have witnessed). I'd hate to be the guy (if there is one) that has to face the ten of us that were there (including another party who was not a part of our group that was there before we were, and stayed till after the police left) and try to say they saw us.

Also Ranb, did you email the Sheriffs office? Funny Haley would reply to this, unless you emailed him directly. Just curious.

Originally Posted by coctailer

You should give them a link to this thread.

It sounds like Ranb gave Haley the link. Good, now they can see how many people are in favor of their position.

Originally Posted by Bhowe

It sounds like Ranb gave Haley the link. Good, now they can see how many people are in favor of their position.

If they are watching this thread, then perhaps they would like to go to Sultan Pit and shoot some MGs.
We can chat with them over a beer.
Maybe they will see that we are not bad-guys.

I'll buy them a Herfy's Burger if they show up.

Or they may try to confiscate your FA's!

Originally Posted by Bhowe

Or they may try to confiscate your FA's!

Legally, they are allowed to.

One of the guns is a DOE prototype SMG though. They may have an issue with that.

I did e-mail the sheriff's office directly using the address on their website. I was not interested in dealing with Deputy Haley as I was sure (and correct) that he would not comment on any ongoing "criminal" case. I was hoping to get the Sheriff's position on silencers in his county.

I will try the sheriff again in the future maybe, as should anyone else here wanting to know more about how the police in the area feel about gun owners. Remember to be polite and do not make any accusations you can not prove.

Ranb