Dissapointed but not surprised about Local SD

[lamrith]

Well,
My oldest son came home lastnight all wound up and "scared for me" from school yesterday. Typical first day handouts, memo's etc and this one was part of it(see attached). While I do not think anyone would argue that schools are gun free zones, there are specific subsections dealing with cpl, and picking up/dropping off kids at school.

Well the SD decided to SPECIFICALLY not list subsection 3, part E from thier notification, while they did mention 3;b,c,f&h briefly as a footnote with no details. I have to say this is pretty dissapointing. The way it is laid out and worded it is like they want kids to think thier parents are breaking the law, panic and maybe even rat out thier parents for carrying legally. Thankfully my son was smart enough (because I told him our gun ownership is our business and NOBODY elses) to keep his mouth shut and come home to ask about it. How many others may not be, or countered the faculty with "My dad says it is legal when he picks me up"..? If you are going to quote law, tell the truth , the WHOLE TRUTH.

I did read deeper into the section of the law and in a latter subsection, it does state it is illegal to enter any private or public school building.

I am thinking I will write an anonymous letter to the district as I do not want myself or my son singled out or targeted. I would include the full RCW 9.41.280 legal information highlighting their obvious, intentional omission and let them know that the legal carry community will be paying attention if they try to prosecute or make an example of any one legally carrying while picking up their child.

Thoughts?

Read More

 

[pokerace]

Go for it...

 

[lamrith]

Latest revision (8/31), I shifted paragraphs around a bit to bring additional information in:

Christopher Jacksen
[email protected]
Tacoma, WA
August 30, 2012

Assistant Superintendent
Franklin Pierce School district
315 129th Street South
Tacoma, WA 98444

Dear Assistant Superintendent:
I am writing this letter to you to express my disappointment in the school district and the Office of the Assistant Superintendent specifically with regards to the Student/Parent/Principal contract for eliminating guns and weapons from Schools, which was sent home with our child this week. I am writing it under a Pen Name to protect myself and more importantly our child from being singled out as the child of gun owners, but also allow you to respond.

While I do not think that any intelligent or rational person will disagree that our children's safety is of the utmost importance, the way this contract was written is not only incorrect, but also comes across as being a bit menacing toward the owners and legal carriers of firearms.

Those of us that have taken the time and gone thru the extensive background checks to obtain a Washington CPL, do so to protect ourselves and our families as is our right under both the United States and Washington State Constitutions. The recent events of shootings only further reinforce the need for the public to protect itself against criminals and those that would do harm to other innocent people. The police cannot be at all places at all times to protect us. There are now in Excess of 366,000 CPL holders in Washington State alone, driven largely due to the increase in violence around the country as well as locally.

Just this week a person with a concealed handgun license saved the life of an unarmed mother dropping her child off at school. I attach a print out of the article with this letter that provides details. If that gentleman had not been carrying his firearm and stepped in as he is legally entitled to, the woman stabbed would not have survived and her attacker gotten away. Per the wording of your Contract he would have been breaking the Law here in WA, when in actuality he was completely within the law having his firearm at the school while picking up his child outside of the school building.

Whether due to a mistake on your part or an intentional omission, you left out section 3,(e) of the RCW while you did list sections 3;a,b,h and subsection 6. This is an extremely important subsection.

RCW9.41.280
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(e) Any person in possession of a pistol who has been issued a license under RCW 9.41.070, or is exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060, while picking up or dropping off a student;

Given the document you have provided it would be very easy for a legally armed parent to be detained at gunpoint by police responding to a call from an improperly informed staff member. This would humiliate the parent as well as cause severe trauma to the student who would likely face widespread ridicule by classmates and discrimination by staff after the fact. The stigma associated with their parent being arrested or detained by the police, even if for no actual wrong doing, is something that will follow and adversely affect the lives of all involved for years to come. It is the districts responsibility to not only educate our children but to also protect their physical and mental wellbeing as well as their dignity.

I find that a bit of a concern as your omission will cause children of legally carrying parents to question their own parent's actions. Most of the document focuses on the severe penalties imposed, to the point of bolding a portion of the RCW for added emphasis, while at the same time does not include a single one line subsection that is critical for both parents and more importantly educators and SD staff to be aware of. The way it is laid out serves to coerce those with the ability to legally carry too decide to not carry, even though it is legal to do so, due to fear of prosecution. That is illegal under RCW 9A.36.070 as follows.

(1) A person is guilty of coercion if by use of a threat he or she compels or induces a person to engage in conduct which the latter has a legal right to abstain from, or to abstain from conduct which he or she has a legal right to engage in.
(2) "Threat" as used in this section means:
(a) To communicate, directly or indirectly, the intent immediately to use force against any person who is present at the time; or
(b) Threats as defined in *RCW 9A.04.110(28).

Any reasonable person reading your document would conclude that it is illegal to carry when they pick up or drop off their child at school, and feel coerced not to excercise their legal right to do so, when in fact that is not true.
We ask that you please revise your documentation and to properly outline the WHOLE LAW and not just the sections you may agree with, and then rerelease it to the district and students. This is a simple edit that can be completed in a few minutes and still maintain the document as one page. The School District's job is to properly and FULLY educate our children, withholding or ignoring relevant legal and potentially life threatening information is borderline negligent and simply not acceptable.

The Firearms community is aware of this situation and we will be watching to make sure the appropriate changes are made and published, as well as make sure that no-one is improperly detained or charged due to this omission on your part.

Sincerely,
Christopher Jacksen

I will be including a copy of the Article posted today about the stabbing, and may include a print out of the full RWW9.41.280 from the apps.leg.wa.gov website.

Thoughts, input?

 

[Member 5605]

Keep us posted.. hopefully (doubtful albeit) they submit a retraction letter of their misinformation.

 

[lamrith]

I have just had a fellow CPL holder at work proof the lwetter and he recommended I change that second to last paragraph to require they correct and resubmit the contract thru the district immediately...

I am editing the above post to reflect that change.

Per his suggestion I think I will also be sending copies of my letter and the contract out to Dave Workman for further follow up.

 

[deen_ad]

Good letter. Our schools haven't started up yet but I'll certainly be reading what they send home with the 12 yr old grandson we're raising!

 

[lamrith]

If he is aware that you have guns and Carry it might be worth just mentioning to him that it is nobody's business, and to just listen and come home to ask questions..

I was lucky the younger child either did not get the notification or more likely could not understand it due to age..

 

[Wifey]

Having a bit if trouble reading the attachment---is this a public school? I'm also curious (and maybe I missed it) how old is your child? Not that it matters, just curious as you must tell him to keep things quiet - that's horrible for a child as secrets suck.
I think your letter is very well written. Please let us know what transpires.
Wifey

 

[lamrith]

Yes it is a public school, I have two kids, middle school and high school, I did not realize it would get shrunk down so much as an attachement. The high schooler brought this home and was concerned.

I told both my children that my choice to carry is our family business and nobody else is to know. At the same time I made sure to tell and show them both that what I was doing was legal and while we had nothing to hide that there are people out there that are afraid of guns. That some people are so anti-gun that they may create a problem where none exists if they found out about my weapon.

Yes I was worried about telling them to keep a secret, it is not a good way to live. But they needed to know that I carry a weapon and it is in the house, and that it is not information to be shared with others for our security if nothing else.

 

[Botte Hork]

Something interesting for a local NRA representative to take action on? A nice ad in the newspaper with this letter and the explanation that they conveniently skipped printing 9.41.280 section 3(e). It costs money, but it both informs the public on what is allowed and what not, as well as publicly spanks the school (district?) for scaring kids and parents. That could be a valuable investment.

 

[ocarolan]

Cool letter. I noticed a few punctuation issues and bogus words - "thru", "after-words", "in actuality". You may want someone to edit it, since people in education tend to be sensitive to good grammar.

Conversely, your natural style does help demonstrate the letter was written by an average joe and not (say) some lobbyist.

 

[lamrith]

@Botte - Good idea, I will look into the NRA a bit.

Yes it has been quite a while since I was in English class.. I am a bit rusty on the fine points. I am fixing at least the words and will double check the punctuation as well.

 

[Atroxus]

Good luck with that. I hope they correct the omissions, but I somehow doubt it was unintentional.

 

[hermannr]

Here is what I came up with today @ lunch;

Concerned Parent
Tacoma, WA
August 30, 2012
Assistant Superintendent

Franklin Pierce School district
315 129th Street South
Tacoma, WA 98444

Dear Assistant Superintendent:
I am writing this letter to you to express my disappointment in the school district and the Office of the Assistant Superintendent specifically with regards to the Student/Parent/Principal contract for eliminating guns and weapons from Schools, which was sent home with our child this week. I am writing it anonymously to protect myself and more importantly our child from being singled out as the child of gun owners.

While I do not think that any intelligent or rational person will disagree that our children's safety is of the utmost importance, the way this contract was written is not only incorrect, but also comes across as being a bit menacing toward the owners and legal carriers of firearms.

Those of us that have taken the time and gone through the extensive background checks to obtain a Washington CPL, do so to protect ourselves and our families as is our right under both the United States and Washington State Constitutions. The recent events of shootings only further reinforce the need for the public to protect itself against criminals and those that would do harm to other innocent people. The police cannot be at all places at all times to protect us. There are now in Excess of 370,000 CPL holders in Washington State alone, driven largely due to the increase in violence around the country as well as locally.

Just this week a person with a concealed handgun license saved the life of an unarmed mother dropping her child off at school. I attach a print out of the article with this letter that provides details. If that gentleman had not been carrying his firearm and stepped in as he is legally entitled to, the woman stabbed would not have survived and her attacker gotten away. Per the wording of your Contract he would have been breaking the Law here in WA, when he was actually completely within the law having his firearm at the school.

Whether due to a mistake on your part or an intentional omission, you left out section 3,(e) of the RCW while you did list sections 3;a,b,h and subsection 6. This is an extremely important subsection.


I find that a bit of a concern as your omission will cause children of legally carrying parents to question their own parent's actions. It may also very well coerce those with the ability to legally carry too not carry, even though it is legal to do so, due to fear of prosecution.

Most of the document focuses on the severe penalties imposed, to the point of bolding a portion of the RCW for added emphasis, while at the same time does not include a single one line subsection that is critical for both parents and more importantly educators and SD staff to be aware of.

Given the document you have provided it would be very easy for a legally armed parent to be detained at gunpoint by police responding to a call from an improperly informed staff member. This would humiliate the parent as well as cause severe trauma to the student who would likely face widespread ridicule by classmates and discrimination by staff after the fact. The stigma associated with their parent being arrested or detained by the police, even if for no actual wrong doing, is something that will follow and adversely affect the lives of all involved for years to come. It is the districts responsibility to not only educate our children but to also protect their physical and mental wellbeing as well as their dignity.

I ask that you please revise your documentation to properly outline the WHOLE LAW and not just the sections you may agree with, and then rerelease it to the district and students. This is a simple edit that can be completed in a few minutes and still maintain the document as one page. The School District's job is to properly and FULLY educate our children, withholding or ignoring relevant legal and potentially life threatening information is borderline negligent and simply not acceptable.

The Firearms community is aware of this situation and we will be watching to make sure the appropriate changes are made and published, as well as make sure that no-one is improperly detained or charged due to this omission on your part.

Sincerely,
Concerned Parent

I will be including a copy of the Article posted today about the stabbing, and may include a print out of the full RWW9.41.280 from the apps.leg.wa.gov website.

Thoughts, input?

If you really want to stink the works, you need to put your name on the complaint...then if they single you out, or worse, your child, as an "Example" you have them by the gonads in court.

May I add: There are young lawyers out there that will take a good civil rights case pro bono just to make a name for themselves.

 

[Misterbill]

If you really want to stink the works, you need to put your name on the complaint...then if they single you out, or worse, your child, as an "Example" you have them by the gonads in court.

May I add: There are young lawyers out there that will take a good civil rights case pro bono just to make a name for themselves.

I think the fear of retaliation is really unfounded. And an anonymous letter will not be paid much attention to.

Send the letter and then show up and read it at your next school board meeting. I guarantee you you'll get a lot better response.

 

[Siuslaw Warrior]

I'd be more concerned about the other 'stuff' they shared with your child regarding firearms.

Effective social engineering starts with the very young.

 

[lamrith]

Yes that is why when I informed my kids that there were firearms in the house and I carried I filled them in on the law as well as why I carry.

I just revised the letter a bit to include new recommended information.

 

[Sincere]

I applaud how professional you are being in your response.

 

[DieselScout]

Very well written and I wish I could put together such a well thought out piece.

My only though is in your second paragraph you state, "... but also comes across as being a bit menacing toward the owners and legal carriers of firearms." I know by Oregon definition menacing is accomplished with a weapon or making someone think you have a weapon to do them harm. I don't know if it's the same for Washington, and I don't know if it's important. I think threatening is too soft of a word, but better defines what you're going after.

 

[DeanfromOregon]

I would meet with the principal of your son's school Stick to the facts and leave out the emotion. Say your oldest son was "Scared for you" based on the information the school gave him. That information was not the law and was innacurate, bring a copy of the statute with you. This will prevent misunderstandings and embarassment for the school in the future if someone decides to get too zealous (ex-wife, etc). If the guy is reasonable they'll get it. If they're not reasonable then you're pissin in the wind anyways.

My goal would be to have them list the statute, with exceptions, in it's entirety in future notices.