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

Though I am sure they have more important concerns I guess that the State of WA AG's office knows that this law is going to eventually cause a problem.

As soon as one "civilian" gets hauled into court over using a suppressor a hundred witnesses will appear at the trial, under oath, describing how they have witnessed LE using suppressors. There is no exemption under the state law or an AG's opinion that permits LE to use a suppressor.

There are at least two PDs in the Seattle area that openly use suppressors in their SWAT team training.

The State is screwed. They can hardly give an amnesty to PD offenders and not civilians for breaking the same law. They can't stand the publicity of a lawsuit that exposes years of officially condoned law breaking. The best thing that could happen for the state judiciary is that the law is rewritten permitting use, then nobody will have a reason to bring up the previous state of affairs. The only difficulty there is the bunch of Seattle area anti politicians who would rather fry than give an inch on gun rights.

Good old civil disobedience.

The only way to get the bill allowing registered silencer use to the legislature floor is to convince the House and Senate Judiciary chairmen to give it a chance. So far the House chairman will not. Here is the House bill; http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...1604&year=2009

I have written to Jamie Pedersen. http://www.leg.wa.gov/House/Represen.../pedersen.aspx He comes off sounding like a real dick. When I asked about HB1604, he referred to it as a controversial bill and tried to blow me off by claiming that the House passed two pro-gun bills and blocked one anti-gun bill. He wants me to think it is OK to ration rights.

Senator Kline is another piece of work. http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Senators/Pages/kline.aspx He thinks that certain gun control bills are a good idea for Washington because they get passed in California. He openly admits that the anti-gun legislation that he supports will not reduce crime, but thinks it is a good idea anyway. I’m sure he will be an obstacle if the House bill is ever considered by the Senate.

Some of the Judiciary committee members here; http://www.leg.wa.gov/House/Committe...bersStaff.aspx and here; http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committ...bersStaff.aspx are more sympathetic towards gun owners. Writing to the other members may help convince the chairmen to let 1604 have a fair chance for a vote on the floor.

Ranb

I would be willing to help fund petitions and such, we should form a not so angry mob. If we all push it may work. We could get this on the news and get it on a ballot.

Any supporters?

How many people own silencers and want to use them in this state? Or would like to own them but thought it was pointless if you cannot use them?

Originally Posted by Bhowe

How many people own silencers and want to use them in this state? Or would like to own them but thought it was pointless if you cannot use them?

I would love to own silencers and possibly make them too, but I certainly don't want to drive to Oregon to use them lawfully, so for now I'm holding off.

I certainly will support the legalization of use of silencers in WA...

Count me in. I would pony up some penny's for the fund. My tax stamp should come back in 2 months.

The thing to do is call Rep Cary Condotta the sponser of SB-1604 which would allow the use of a suppressor's in Washington. You can reach him in Oly @ 360-786-7954 or his district office @ 509-664-1274. The last I heard this bill never had a hearing.

Originally Posted by Bhowe

How many people own silencers and want to use them in this state? Or would like to own them but thought it was pointless if you cannot use them?

I would be so inclined to sign a petetion if one were presented. I travel to Ore often and often thought about doing the paperwork.

I hope you get your cans back.

Count me in!!! I own one and want to use it here!!!!!!!!

Amazing thread.. yes, I did survive the whole thing.

A few comments:

perhaps the BEST reason the OP had the cans with him is so that an ignorant Snohomish County Sheriff can get taken down a few pegs by his boss, the ATF, and/or the prosecutor. I thought this bit priceless:

The Snohomish DA is the Vice President of the Washington Arms Collectors Association, and sells guns at every show. He also holds an FFL

Eikenverry's lletter to the senator, above, makes it very clear the legal status. Unless a court case more recent exists, that opinion will bind, most likely.

The cop claimed mere possession of the silencers was a "class C felony", Washignton law requires that an accusation of such a serious offense include a ride downtown, and booking... though bail is often offered before actually seeing the wrong side of the bars. (presently there is legislation pending to give judges the discretion to refuse bail in cases when the defendant is considered dangerous.. as should have happened to Maurice Clemmens, the Lakewood LE killer. amazingly enough, our hero Kline voted AGAINST this. No telling what rattles about within that man's cranium.

I am surprised to see so many responses here seemingly railing on the OP, attaching nefarious motives, accusing of stupidity (or near equivalent), and carelessness. Nonsense. The man obviously knows the laws (his experience in certain gunshops, having fully complied with ALL legal requirements, etc) knew he was within his rights....

One bit of advice for anyone in a similarly stupid confrontation with ignorant LEO's..... zip it. Yes, shut your cakehole.

When the officer approached, asking about suppressors, you will be fully within your rights to say nothing beyond identifying yourself. So, he wants to see them? "no, sir, I will not comply, this is an unlawful order". Asks to search the car? "not witout a warrant". Make the copper get the warrant... he'll need probable cause (an anonymous tip may, or may not, meet this). He'll need to describe the specific place to search... your car... and the specific items being sought... the silencers.... BUT he will ALSO have to convince the judge there is a crime committed..... or suspicion thereof. He will have to state the RCW in question... at which point the judge will almost certainly know, or read, the law, and realise mere possession is not illegal... and thus deny the warrant.

Whenever LE is confronting you, and obviously intent on doing you harm, saying nothing is the safest course. ANYTHING you say can, and will, be used against you, NOTHING you say can even be admissible as evidence in your defense.
The US Supreme Court has held that the search of a private vehicle without a warrant (or immediate probable cause) violates the Fourth Ammendment, unlawful search. In this case, the officer had neither. He would have had to detain you, call for backup, have someone fetch the warrant....... and likely fail. Meanwhile, you're chillin out, waiting for him to DO something...... and he's got no legal access to your stuff.


Amazing how one man (Kline) can weild such power in determining what laws get passed in this state. HE doesn't like a bill, he won't allow it to be heard in committee. He likes one (or writes one), he gives it a hearing it doesn't deserve.

Likely a bit late in the season, but maybe a citizens' initiative?

Politics in this state is getting about as bad as California's.... maybe time to move?

Originally Posted by tionico

Amazing thread.. yes, I did survive the whole thing.

A few comments:

perhaps the BEST reason the OP had the cans with him is so that an ignorant Snohomish County Sheriff can get taken down a few pegs by his boss, the ATF, and/or the prosecutor. I thought this bit priceless:

The Snohomish DA is the Vice President of the Washington Arms Collectors Association, and sells guns at every show. He also holds an FFL

Eikenverry's lletter to the senator, above, makes it very clear the legal status. Unless a court case more recent exists, that opinion will bind, most likely.

The cop claimed mere possession of the silencers was a "class C felony", Washignton law requires that an accusation of such a serious offense include a ride downtown, and booking... though bail is often offered before actually seeing the wrong side of the bars. (presently there is legislation pending to give judges the discretion to refuse bail in cases when the defendant is considered dangerous.. as should have happened to Maurice Clemmens, the Lakewood LE killer. amazingly enough, our hero Kline voted AGAINST this. No telling what rattles about within that man's cranium.

I am surprised to see so many responses here seemingly railing on the OP, attaching nefarious motives, accusing of stupidity (or near equivalent), and carelessness. Nonsense. The man obviously knows the laws (his experience in certain gunshops, having fully complied with ALL legal requirements, etc) knew he was within his rights....

One bit of advice for anyone in a similarly stupid confrontation with ignorant LEO's..... zip it. Yes, shut your cakehole.

When the officer approached, asking about suppressors, you will be fully within your rights to say nothing beyond identifying yourself. So, he wants to see them? "no, sir, I will not comply, this is an unlawful order". Asks to search the car? "not witout a warrant". Make the copper get the warrant... he'll need probable cause (an anonymous tip may, or may not, meet this). He'll need to describe the specific place to search... your car... and the specific items being sought... the silencers.... BUT he will ALSO have to convince the judge there is a crime committed..... or suspicion thereof. He will have to state the RCW in question... at which point the judge will almost certainly know, or read, the law, and realise mere possession is not illegal... and thus deny the warrant.

Whenever LE is confronting you, and obviously intent on doing you harm, saying nothing is the safest course. ANYTHING you say can, and will, be used against you, NOTHING you say can even be admissible as evidence in your defense.
The US Supreme Court has held that the search of a private vehicle without a warrant (or immediate probable cause) violates the Fourth Ammendment, unlawful search. In this case, the officer had neither. He would have had to detain you, call for backup, have someone fetch the warrant....... and likely fail. Meanwhile, you're chillin out, waiting for him to DO something...... and he's got no legal access to your stuff.


Amazing how one man (Kline) can weild such power in determining what laws get passed in this state. HE doesn't like a bill, he won't allow it to be heard in committee. He likes one (or writes one), he gives it a hearing it doesn't deserve.

Likely a bit late in the season, but maybe a citizens' initiative?

Politics in this state is getting about as bad as California's.... maybe time to move?

Do they often get search warrants for misdemeanors?

Any new Intel from the O.P.?

broderick, i hope you get your suppressors back. i really do. the crap that the Sno sheriff pulled is BS. fight this as far as it will go and dont settle for anything less. if you get a petition started to get suppressor use legal in washington, let me know and i will sign it in a heartbeat.

Do they often get search warrants for misdemeanors?


not likely.. but the cop said he's got a C class Felony rap on our man, which is what he'd likely base a warrant on... but, when the DA and judge have a look, they'll likely tell the cop to let him go, no crime.

Don;t know that much about Sno County, but the more I hear the firmer its position on my "I will NOT live in that county" list. Its a firm number three now..... up from #4.

Originally Posted by dj_fatstyles

broderick, i hope you get your suppressors back. i really do. the crap that the Sno sheriff pulled is BS. fight this as far as it will go and dont settle for anything less. if you get a petition started to get suppressor use legal in washington, let me know and i will sign it in a heartbeat.

What it would take is for someone to write up the proposed legislation.. maybe a good start would be the bill now refused a hearing in Kline's little Social Club Judiciary Commmittee. Or the House version of same.

Then, perhaps with the help of a state legislator, get the petition going to put it on the ballot next November. If we all worked toward getting enough signatures on the petition, we might make it onto the ballot. Not sure how many that is, but I know its more than the total number of members we have here.

I'm game to at least circulate petitions for signatures. If everyone else here, resident in Washington, did the same, it stands a chance of at least getting up for a vote.

THEN the fun begins.... overcoming the panicked opposition from the likes of Kline, Washington Cease Fire, the Brady Nuts.....

it will not likely fly without some money behind it.... how to raise funds? how much to raise?

Might be cause for a new thread, legalising supressor use.

Mods? Or.......?

Before actually issuing a warrant wouldnt a judge check and see if it were a felony level violation or not? Cops don't issue their own warrants. As the law is written it is a gross misdemeanor.

Originally Posted by wired

Before actually issuing a warrant wouldnt a judge check and see if it were a felony level violation or not? Cops don't issue their own warrants. As the law is written it is a gross misdemeanor.

Precisely so.. and a major part of why it would be proper to insist the cop GET the warrant.... very unlikely he would succeed... thus have egg on his face, and maybe be forced to learn a thing or two. Taking a cop down a few pegs by using his own ignorance/stupidity against him is great fun. BUT-- one must be firm, discrete, polite, courteous..... and resolute.

I sent a message to the Snohomish County Sheriff. http://sheriff.snoco.org/

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

I do not really expect to get a reply with anything of substance, especially if this is an ongoing criminal investigation. But any reply would be interesting.

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'm in Monroe right now with some machine guns. Who wants to go shooting at the pit?

That would freak Snoho Sheriff out.

I'd love to. A while back one of the new Class 2's in Mason County showed up at one of the local ranges and sold 30 round mags to dump through one of several machine guns they brought to the range. I tried out the AR-15 and sten gun with integral silencer. Bullet hoses but lots of fun.

Ranb