Open Carry gathering at Starbucks in Spanaway

[gogoDawgs]

Target or no target - it shouldn't be an issue. The issue here is why do we even need these laws in the first place. If I go hiking in the woods and my coat covers my "open carried" gun then technically I need a CPL and am potentially subject to harassment by an over zealous LEO.

All the controversy over "printing" is another wasted effort.

The whole thing is a big gray area. The fundamental issue at hand is why do we require law abiding citizens to jump through all these hoops when it is plainly obvious that criminals are not going to jump through these hoops.

No. There is a clear cut exception when you are hiking, that you can carry in any way you desire. That also includes an exception while driving to and from the outdoor activity.

RCW 9.41.060

The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to
(8) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area;

 

[John Brown]

"Reasonable to conclude". "Legitimate outdoor area". Now THERE's a gray area if I ever saw one.

 

[PBinWA]

No. There is a clear cut exception when you are hiking, that you can carry in any way you desire. That also includes an exception while driving to and from the outdoor activity.

That may be the case but it is a gray enough area that I was told to get a CPL if I wanted to carry a gun in a concealed fashion while hiking/running in DNR lands. This was about 10 years ago - but that was what the LEO told me.

I just didn't want the gun getting wet and flopping around and was having repeated bear encounters where I lived.

Regardless, my main point is that all these extraneous rules, exceptions, and misconceptions do is confuse the otherwise law-abiding person. Criminals don't care about these rules. So who is benefiting from this obfuscation of right vs. wrong?

 

[riverrat373]

Same old one liners that CC only guys use. Remember, for 19 years I thought that way too. One liners do not defend your position, ask a liberal, they have many one liners. For example; "It's Bush's fault", "Common Sense Gun Laws", "Hope, Change"

If you never exercise your right to peaceablly assemble, does the right still exist?

What's wrong with hope or change?:huh:

 

[riverrat373]

"The road to freedom" is also paved with grandstanders who, in this day and age, just might "F" it up for everybody else.

+1

 

[riverrat373]

You should run for office. You seem to be pretty full of rhetoric. Why is it that some people choose to compare apples to porcupines? Rosa Parks? Give me a break.....

Good night now.

+1

 

[riverrat373]

Regardless, my main point is that all these extraneous rules, exceptions, and misconceptions do is confuse the otherwise law-abiding person. Criminals don't care about these rules. So who is benefiting from this obfuscation of right vs. wrong?

That's because our laws are written by and for lawyers therefore requiring us to hire them because we don't understand them!

 

[PBinWA]

That's because our laws are written by and for lawyers therefore requiring us to hire them because we don't understand them!

Exactly. Perhaps we just need to bar lawyers from public office? I'd post a smiley but I'm not so sure that it's not a good idea.

 

[riverrat373]

Exactly. Perhaps we just need to bar lawyers from public office? I'd post a smiley but I'm not so sure that it's not a good idea.

+1

 

[Ben2K]

Does Washington state law specifically address the question of police asking for ID? There was a very public case some years ago in Nevada (I think), where a gut was arrested for refusing to show a cop his ID, and in that case there was a state law requiring him to do so.

 

[soberups]

If a cop politely asks to see my ID, I will politely provide it. The sooner that he determines that I am not a bad guy, the sooner he can devote his time and effort elsewhere. The time he would waste arguing with me over an ultimately irrelevant technicality is time he could spend chasing the real bad guys...which is best for both of us and society as a whole.

Do I have the right to refuse to provide ID? Yes. Is excercising that right the correct choice to make in all situations? No.

 

[Ben2K]

Does Washington state law specifically address the question of police asking for ID? There was a very public case some years ago in Nevada (I think), where a gut was arrested for refusing to show a cop his ID, and in that case there was a state law requiring him to do so.

I knew there was a case about this in Nevada! Police arrested a man just for refusing to show them his ID. There is even video of the actual event.

The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, who decided 5-4 that you must provide cops with ID and answer questions.

So much for the Fifth Amendment. It's a Brave New World.

 

[riverrat373]

I knew there was a case about this in Nevada! Police arrested a man just for refusing to show them his ID. There is even video of the actual event.



So much for the Fifth Amendment. It's a Brave New World.

I think you mean 4th Amendment don't you?

 

[Sawdust]

I think you mean 4th Amendment don't you?

Actually, Hiibel argued his case under both 4th and 5th Amendment violations. You can see that in the ruling.

 

[riverrat373]

Actually, Hiibel argued his case under both 4th and 5th Amendment violations. You can see that in the ruling.

He argued his case under both the 4th and 5th Amendments, but, I don't think, ( I'm not a lawyer ) giving your name to a police officer constitutes self incrimination. :huh:

 

[Ben2K]

Originally Posted by Sawdust:
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable ... the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington

Cool quote. Unfortunately, there is no record that George Washington ever said this. There is no record at all of the quote prior to 1989!

 

[riverrat373]

Cool quote. Unfortunately, there is no record that George Washington ever said this. There is no record at all of the quote prior to 1989!

Great link! Thanks.

 

[catwithboost]

So in the state of Wa. Where can you legally OC?

 

[gogoDawgs]

I knew there was a case about this in Nevada! Police arrested a man just for refusing to show them his ID. There is even video of the actual event.

The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, who decided 5-4 that you must provide cops with ID and answer questions.

So much for the Fifth Amendment. It's a Brave New World.

Only because in his state there was a state law for a stop and identify.

In Washington there is no law on the books and therefore you do not have to identify yourself to LEO if you are doing nothing illegal.

 

[gogoDawgs]

So in the state of Wa. Where can you legally OC?

The same places you can legally CC. The law makes no determination between CC or OC. I suggest you read the law, 9.41 or read the FAQs at opencarry.org in the Washington forum. Washington