Open Carry In Washington?

[crosse]

So your answer is, "there really isn't a good reason except people want to." Which is fine. And if the general public decides to be offended by that and cause hassle by reporting those individuals who insist on it as a nuisance, I'm fine with that too.

I got my CPL many many years ago because whether or not I'm carrying is my business, not anyone else's...unless they are attempting to inflict fatal harm on me and mine. Then I'd like for them to be unpleasantly surprised.

Plus of the people I've met that insist on open carry, 100% of them have been jackasses. That doesn't mean all are, just the sample group of 40 I've met over the years.

actually he gives many other reasons besides the one you listed. easier access, comfort, improved draw, these are all things that the standard CCW'er achieves to have. the only difference is open display of the self-defense tool. Constitutional rights are meant to be exercised and explored. ALL of them circumstances willing.

and I like OC'ing but only because I like to take my jacket off on occasion and hate IWB large pistols. 90% of the time, I just CCW but other 10% I do both.

 

[JumpWing]

From another thread on NWFA:

First item: For those who persistently exhort that open carry will A) make you a "first target" during a crime, or B) result in a BG snatching your gun... Please, please, PLEASE provide a couple of news stories where this has happened to an ordinary civilian. (Cops, and others who make a career of confronting violent felons don't count for what should be very obvious reasons.) Given the anti-gun nature of the media for the past several decades, it should be NO problem to track down these kinds of stories. So, any time during, say, the last 30 years. From any state in the Union.

Item 2: Openly carrying isn't about doing it "because you can." It's about taking on the task of being a GOOD, PUBLIC EXAMPLE of a gun owner. Everyone on this board should understand how important that is. This is no easy task, by the way. In order to be a good representative of gun owners, you have to be prepared to meet the slung dung of gun-haters without losing your cool, snapping back in retort, or giving them the verbal/physical response they so richly deserve. This takes more than just being a "nice guy." You also have to be prepared to have your plans for the day ruined because you happened to bump into one of the few cops who insist on hassling/delaying/intimidating you for carrying; or one of the normal cops who, in a professionally diligent response to a MWAG call, will want to make contact with you.

 

[gogoDawgs]

From another thread on NWFA:

First item: For those who persistently exhort that open carry will A) make you a "first target" during a crime, or B) result in a BG snatching your gun... Please, please, PLEASE provide a couple of news stories where this has happened to an ordinary civilian. (Cops, and others who make a career of confronting violent felons don't count for what should be very obvious reasons.) Given the anti-gun nature of the media for the past several decades, it should be NO problem to track down these kinds of stories. So, any time during, say, the last 30 years. From any state in the Union.

Item 2: Openly carrying isn't about doing it "because you can." It's about taking on the task of being a GOOD, PUBLIC EXAMPLE of a gun owner. Everyone on this board should understand how important that is. This is no easy task, by the way. In order to be a good representative of gun owners, you have to be prepared to meet the slung dung of gun-haters without losing your cool, snapping back in retort, or giving them the verbal/physical response they so richly deserve. This takes more than just being a "nice guy." You also have to be prepared to have your plans for the day ruined because you happened to bump into one of the few cops who insist on hassling/delaying/intimidating you for carrying; or one of the normal cops who, in a professionally diligent response to a MWAG call, will want to make contact with you.

Excellent post sir!

me yesterday in Olympia...

 

[SimonJester308]

Carry however and whenever you want. I carry concealed because I want discretion, but I carry on my belt outside the waistband. Sometimes the jacket has to come off, and I have never been bothered by anyone. But IMHO no gun owner should tell another gun owner what they should do and how they should do it because of what "others" might or might not think about it.

 

[deen_ad]

4) Is there a gun ban in Seattle?
Despite Mayor Greg Nickels' blustering and media blitz on the issue, there is no "gun ban" in Seattle currently in effect. The nature of the "gun ban" is the use of trespass law, which Seattle city officials, as the "owner of the property" would demand that a gun owner leave and be trespassed, and if they refuse to leave, charge them with armed trespass. Though there is the drafting's of an administrative rule currently being made (as stated by a recent article in the Seattle Times), Mayor Nickels has NOT signed on to any administrative rule. It is well assumed that if any administrative rule is signed to that affect, it will trigger legal action, but not a moment before.

He did in fact sign such a "law" and it was invalidated by court ruling a short while later.

 

[2506]

4) Is there a gun ban in Seattle?
Despite Mayor Greg Nickels' blustering and media blitz on the issue, there is no "gun ban" in Seattle currently in effect. The nature of the "gun ban" is the use of trespass law, which Seattle city officials, as the "owner of the property" would demand that a gun owner leave and be trespassed, and if they refuse to leave, charge them with armed trespass. Though there is the drafting's of an administrative rule currently being made (as stated by a recent article in the Seattle Times), Mayor Nickels has NOT signed on to any administrative rule. It is well assumed that if any administrative rule is signed to that affect, it will trigger legal action, but not a moment before.

He did in fact sign such a "law" and it was invalidated by court ruling a short while later.

I'm fairly certain Nickels isn't going to be signing on an administrative rule, nor performing any other mayoral duties. That's just a hunch.

 

[sigman]

My only problem with open carry comes from the bad guys knowing who to attack first. I say let them guess before they get 2 to the chest and 1 to the head!

I also hear of places where the police will prone you out even thou they KNOW it is legal. As an intimidation tactic to get you to stop carring that way.

 

[Backwoods]

Bob I only know you are carrying because you always are... and when you are walking around your house with a tucked in shirt and the gun on the outside that doesnt help conceal it...

 

[Lammo]

I think you're referring to WA State v. Casad. Although the judge's remarks were favorable (paraphrasing: "open carry, being legal, does not warrant alarm in and of itself") the case was less than ideal in that Casad was pushing the envelope of what most of us would call mature, responsible behavior.

There's also some legal mumbo jumbo about his remarks being "published" but not citable as a precedent? You'd have to ask someone smarter than me for the details on that one.

The Casad case was decided by Division 2 of the Court of Appeals in 2007. The court has discretion to decide to publish a case that it believes has precedential value. RCW 2.06.040. Unpublished cases cannot be cited as authority in future cases and are not binding. WA Court Rules, GR 14.1. It used to be nearly impossible to access the unpublished opinions but they are now at the fingertips of anyone with a Westlaw or Lexis account. They are also available at the Courts web site for 90 days. www.courts.wa.gov/opinons. So, what are unpublished opinions good for? Well, since they aren't "published" they can be freely "plagiarized". I cut and paste language from unpublished cases into my briefs all the time. They also provide a road map for arguments to make. The Casad case provides a perfect example of this. I, for one, really wish it had been published.

 

[gogoDawgs]

My only problem with open carry comes from the bad guys knowing who to attack first. I say let them guess before they get 2 to the chest and 1 to the head!

I also hear of places where the police will prone you out even thou they KNOW it is legal. As an intimidation tactic to get you to stop carring that way.

Point #1

Can you cite a time where this has happened to a true open carry individual? Not a LEO or uniformed security. I am not saying that it can't happen but if it ever does then the statistical significance will be something like 0.0000001%. Bad guys who murder indiscriminately are very rare, most bad guys simply want to intimidate and leave.

Point #2

Here in Washington and more and more in every state those of us who open carry are educating LE, and this is now becoming more and more rare. I will not succumb to the intimidation techniques and I believe that this right needs to be exercised and not lost. I am willing to take the proverbial bullet so that you or your children are not intimidated by LE.

 

[sigman]

I will make sure to grab as much info as I can on any of those cases. I know that once I was in a Fred Meyers in Tacoma and 2 cops asked if I had a gun and had been flashing it around. I said no, that my gun has not been unholstered all day. The gun was bright stainless in a shoulder rig. Well a customer saw the gun under my jacket and called security, who inturn called the police. Somewhere between the customer, security, Police dispatcher and Police the story got a little misrepresented. The female patron was shocked was shocked when the police told her I had a permit to carry. She actually said "you mean he is allowed to carry a gun in a store".

 

[gunnin88]

This is purely my preception and not meant to piss any one off. Anyway the few people I have seen open carry in public places seam to be weird in some way. Like they want to show off or prove a point. IMHO.

 

[gogoDawgs]

This is purely my preception and not meant to piss any one off. Anyway the few people I have seen open carry in public places seam to be weird in some way. Like they want to show off or prove a point. IMHO.

Then I challenge you to meet up with me, you will find that is not the case. I am a father of 2 teenage daughters, a businessman, a high school basketball referee, a former PTA president and just go about life normally, albeit with a sidearm in plain view. Although 99.99% of the people never see it!

 

[gunnin88]

"Although 99.99% of the people never see it!"

and that is the issue.

 

[gogoDawgs]

"Although 99.99% of the people never see it!"

and that is the issue.

In your opinion, how is that the issue?

I find it curious at least as I believe most people 'think' they are aware of their surroundings. And many people are aware, however, it is because I don't draw attention to myself with my dress or demeanor that most don't see 'it.' I am the average guy next to you in the grocery store, there is no reason, based either on my behavior or dress, to not trust me and therefore you go about your business as usual.

 

[JumpWing]

The idea that 99.99% of people never notice an openly carried firearm does more to support open carry than concealed carry: i.e., no point in concealing since most people walk around with blinders on in the first place.

As for the "wierdos," yes there are plenty of people who carry openly and neglect to conduct themselves as a good example of a firearms owner, thus giving the entire group a bad image. The two possible solutions are 1.) Hide your gun and let the "oddballs" continue to determine the public image of a gun owner; or 2.) Carry openly and be a visible and conscientious good example.

To carry or not to carry continues to be based on the need/desire for convenience. "Do I have time today to deal with the potential hassles of openly carrying?" If you don't (as many of us are indeed short on time) then conceal it legally and go about your business. However, if you DO have the time to answer questions, respond maturely to bad attitudes, or chat with responding LEOs, then open carry.

For over a year now (on this and other forums) I've been challenging people to produce a creditable news story where a law-abiding, OCing private citizen was targeted or placed at a strategic disadvantage because of his/her carry choice. In spite of decades of open carry and a liberal media who would gleefully pounce on any such story, the results have been a big, fat zero.

The only strategy criminals employ is to look around for potential obstacles that would hinder an easy score: uniformed cops, armed security, an over-abundance of witnesses, etc. If they identify a potential problem, they go somewhere else because they're smart enough to realize that murderers are pursued with vastly more resources--and are punished more severely--than thieves or robbers.

There is one--ONE!--argument I've heard that logically supports concealing: In the event that you are in a public place (a mall for example) and some fruitcake walks in with the deliberate intention of mass murder then you may very well be targeted, especially if his plan includes his own death, because he's looking for a high body count and doesn't expect to "get away."

 

[gogoDawgs]

The idea that 99.99% of people never notice an openly carried firearm does more to support open carry than concealed carry: i.e., no point in concealing since most people walk around with blinders on in the first place.

As for the "wierdos," yes there are plenty of people who carry openly and neglect to conduct themselves as a good example of a firearms owner, thus giving the entire group a bad image. The two possible solutions are 1.) Hide your gun and let the "oddballs" continue to determine the public image of a gun owner; or 2.) Carry openly and be a visible and conscientious good example.

To carry or not to carry continues to be based on the need/desire for convenience. "Do I have time today to deal with the potential hassles of openly carrying?" If you don't (as many of us are indeed short on time) then conceal it legally and go about your business. However, if you DO have the time to answer questions, respond maturely to bad attitudes, or chat with responding LEOs, then open carry.

For over a year now (on this and other forums) I've been challenging people to produce a creditable news story where a law-abiding, OCing private citizen was targeted or placed at a strategic disadvantage because of his/her carry choice. In spite of decades of open carry and a liberal media who would gleefully pounce on any such story, the results have been a big, fat zero.

The only strategy criminals employ is to look around for potential obstacles that would hinder an easy score: uniformed cops, armed security, an over-abundance of witnesses, etc. If they identify a potential problem, they go somewhere else because they're smart enough to realize that murderers are pursued with vastly more resources--and are punished more severely--than thieves or robbers.

There is one--ONE!--argument I've heard that logically supports concealing: In the event that you are in a public place (a mall for example) and some fruitcake walks in with the deliberate intention of mass murder then you may very well be targeted, especially if his plan includes his own death, because he's looking for a high body count and doesn't expect to "get away."

Well said and I find great observation.