Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Oly Open carry results in ban at capitol

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by IronMonster, Jan 19, 2015.

  1. IronMonster

    IronMonster Washington Opinionated Member Diamond Supporter

    Messages:
    4,187
    Likes Received:
    6,676
    http://www.guns.com/2015/01/19/gun-...on-senate-gallery-results-in-ban-on-firearms/


    Blaming a rally by a group of legally armed Second Amendment advocates at the state Capitol in Olympia Thursday, Washington’s Lt. Governor ruled Friday that guns are now banned from the chamber.

    The rally of some 200 gun rights activists on the steps of the Capitol building Jan. 15, was a continuation of the vocal opposition to the state’s background check ballot referendum, I-594, passed by voters last November. However, when the protest spilled over into the public gallery, there was an altercation between an open carrier and a state police lieutenant that ended with threats of removal and arrest.

    The next day, Lt. Gov. Brad Owen (D) who serves as the president of the state Senate, announced a prohibition on the open carry of firearms in the public gallery moving forward.

    “I don’t want the people who are on the floor being fearful of doing their job,” Owen told the Seattle Times, stressing that he had the support of both caucuses in the Senate in his move. “I don’t want parents concerned about the safety of their kids as pages.”

    The event that led to the ban occurred when State Patrol Lt. Mike Eggleston in the gallery confronted an activist Jason McMillon on Thursday. Eggleston advised McMillion that he was carrying his Rock River LAR-PDS pistol in a “tactical” manner. After threatening McMillion with arrest, the activist, a 20-year military veteran, concealed the firearm.

    Eggleston contended that the manner McMillion was carrying his gun was in violation of state law, which prohibits displaying a firearm to “intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.”

    One of the harshest critics of the events behind the crackdown in the state Capitol came from Alan Gottlieb, chair of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, both of which are headquartered in the state. It is the SAF that is leading the charge against I-594 in the courts.

    “This is the result of a few stupid extremists on our side who not only handled their firearms unsafely, but made the hundreds of Second Amendment supporters at the rally look foolish,” Gottlieb told Guns.com. “Irresponsible actions get us bad results. Unfortunately, some of the fools in town are on our side. This kind of childish theater hurts our cause. The gun ban crowd is having a field day over this.”

    Gottlieb was largely correct in his final assessment.

    Over the weekend, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence used images from the event published by the Associated Press on their social media page Saturday, labeling the activists, “Insurrectionist thugs.”

    This was followed up by a post Sunday from Moms Demand Action, now allied with former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who blamed the National Rifle Association for the event. This stemmed from the fact that NRA lobbyist Brian Judy spoke at the rally on the Capitol’s steps.

    “This isn’t your grandparents’ NRA,” read a statement on the Moms’ Facebook page. “Instead of spending their resources on promoting sportsmanship, the NRA cheerleads armed gun extremists who brandish their weapons at statehouses.”

    The open carry ban in the Capitol’s gallery is expected to take effect as early as Jan. 19.
    Jason-McMillon.jpg
     
  2. Nwcid

    Nwcid Yakima and N of Spokane Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,593
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Just how does that follow our state laws? Unless he is able to change state law not sure how he can do that.

    RCW 9.41.300
    Weapons prohibited in certain places—Local laws and ordinances—Exceptions—Penalty.
    (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:
    (a) The restricted access areas of a jail, or of a law enforcement facility, or any place used for the confinement of a person (i) arrested for, charged with, or convicted of an offense, (ii) held for extradition or as a material witness, or (iii) otherwise confined pursuant to an order of a court, except an order under chapter 13.32A or 13.34 RCW. Restricted access areas do not include common areas of egress or ingress open to the general public;
    (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).
    For purposes of this subsection (1)(b), "weapon" means any firearm, explosive as defined in RCW 70.74.010, or any weapon of the kind usually known as slung shot, sand club, or metal knuckles, or any knife, dagger, dirk, or other similar weapon that is capable of causing death or bodily injury and is commonly used with the intent to cause death or bodily injury.
    In addition, the local legislative authority shall provide either a stationary locked box sufficient in size for pistols and key to a weapon owner for weapon storage, or shall designate an official to receive weapons for safekeeping, during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building. The locked box or designated official shall be located within the same building used in connection with court proceedings. The local legislative authority shall be liable for any negligence causing damage to or loss of a weapon either placed in a locked box or left with an official during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building.
    The local judicial authority shall designate and clearly mark those areas where weapons are prohibited, and shall post notices at each entrance to the building of the prohibition against weapons in the restricted areas;
    (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;
    (d) That portion of an establishment classified by the state liquor control board as off-limits to persons under twenty-one years of age; or
    (e) The restricted access areas of a commercial service airport designated in the airport security plan approved by the federal transportation security administration, including passenger screening checkpoints at or beyond the point at which a passenger initiates the screening process. These areas do not include airport drives, general parking areas and walkways, and shops and areas of the terminal that are outside the screening checkpoints and that are normally open to unscreened passengers or visitors to the airport. Any restricted access area shall be clearly indicated by prominent signs indicating that firearms and other weapons are prohibited in the area.



    RCW 9.41.290

    State preemption.
    The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
     
  3. dementia

    dementia kent wa Member

    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    14
    The LT Governor is confused . I do want the senator and reps to be fearful, so they do their job. This is not a threat in any way, I simply want them to follow the will of their constituents and not their own close minded viewpoint. We own that gallery and they have no right to bar us.
     
  4. Dyjital

    Dyjital Albany, Ore Flavorite Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    4,907
    Likes Received:
    5,856
    They also banned signs.

    I see no problem with it.

    Let me be clear: I am not a WA resident and I fully support the 2nd A.

    They want to ban signs, backpacks, sunglasses, hats etc they can "when in session".

    I'm sure I'll catch flack for this but the 2nd A supporters were claiming the firearms were their protest tools. So they said if you treat them as tools of protest then we will treat them as signs. We've banned those protest tools as well. Play by their rules and they get their rules get upheld.

    Should have never stated the firearms were tools of protest.
     
  5. Mark W.

    Mark W. Silverton, OR Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    5,778
    Likes Received:
    4,970
    I told you so.
     
  6. jim97701

    jim97701 Bend Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    546
    Likes Received:
    603
    It only takes a couple of idiots to make the whole crowd look bad!! They in no way help to preserve our 2A rights, They just add fuel to the antis fire!!
     
    Capn Jack, IheartSig and U201491 like this.
  7. IheartSig

    IheartSig Beaverton Diamond Supporter Diamond Supporter Platinum Supporter

    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    2,349

    There was some assclown in the pictures I saw with a gas mask on. What the hell man. Why? Way to make us look like idiots.
     
    jim97701, Dyjital and IronMonster like this.
  8. slimer13

    slimer13 Deer Park Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    3,206
    They should have dealt with the individuals abusing and violating the rules instead of the typical knee jerk overreaction that mostly punishes everyone else.

    That's how you can tell its an obvious anti gun ulterior motive.
     
  9. BlindedByScience

    BlindedByScience Vancouver WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    432
    Is open carry legal, yes. Do I support an individual's right to open carry, absolutely. However, we're in the fight of our lives for our gun rights and liberties. What's legal may not always be the best strategic move. We have to win by educating, setting positive examples, showing what responsible firearms owners look and act like. We're not going to win by scaring the crap out of the uninformed. Stunts like this don't help one bit and make every one of us look bad.
     
  10. Just Jim

    Just Jim Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,828
    Likes Received:
    6,267
    Just an old man's opinion but you should never go to the government offices armed as a show piece. They know you have guns so what sense does it make to go around showing them to the media?
     
    BBQ Guy, 3MTA3, U201491 and 1 other person like this.
  11. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,912
    Likes Received:
    19,570
    I too hate to say this, but if that photo is of the actual individual and his posture walking into the Capital building I would have stopped him too, had I been the trooper.

    I am ALL for 2A rights, but I'm also for good manners and being considerate of other people. That jackwagon was just one thumb flick on the selector switch and a finger curl to the trigger from being able to go ballistic for all anyone knew. Nobody knows him (or anyone of us for that matter) from Adam... OCers should keep that in mind.

    That was just a thoughtless, blatant lack of consideration for what he was doing, and quite frankly I find it a selfish act.
     
    3MTA3, Capn Jack, Fast Eddie and 2 others like this.
  12. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up NW USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Government should always be fearful of the people, not the other way around.... that's tyranny.
     
  13. IronMonster

    IronMonster Washington Opinionated Member Diamond Supporter

    Messages:
    4,187
    Likes Received:
    6,676
    That is the actual Jackwagon In question
     
  14. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,912
    Likes Received:
    19,570
    It must be to cover up his bald spot that reveals the very thin transparency of his skull that would show an empty edifice.
     
    3MTA3, jim97701, U201491 and 2 others like this.
  15. Classic

    Classic Federal Way WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    899
    I just consider the source.... I wouldn't have expected that moron to act any different.
    That said, I don't own an IWB holster because my waist is large enough:rolleyes: BUT I always wear clothing that is bulky enough to conceal the weapon just because I don't want to deal with some half A$$ antigunner. Cant say I ever understood the desire to carry openly.
     
  16. BlindedByScience

    BlindedByScience Vancouver WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    432
    I carry concealed all the time. No fuss, no muss, no one knows....because it's concealed.....:cool:
     
  17. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up NW USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Odd, isn't it? The people exercise their rights and the government makes further infringements upon those rights.

    Kind of feels like it was a privilege to begin with.

    If the people stand for that, then the government will soon make it a crime to have that firearm at anytime.

    For those that believe lt. governor is justified because of those few people who lawfully exercised their rights - you deserve what's coming.
     
    timac likes this.
  18. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,912
    Likes Received:
    19,570
    I don't rcall one comment above agreeing with the Lt. Gov's actions. I don't agree with it, but if you're going to walk around in a ready-low carrying posture like the guy in question in the setting/context of a contentious political event (which would have alarmed me had I been there) then you (arguably) deserve what's coming, too.

    You have a right to excerise bad judgement all you want, but you don't have a right to no consequences for it.
     
  19. Dogfish

    Dogfish Washington Member

    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    25
    Interpreted as protesting.

    As the president of the senate he has the right to maintain decorum and he was fully within his rights to maintain order.
     
  20. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up NW USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Yup, like I already said.... privileges.