RCW 9.41.220 Unlawful firearms and parts contraband

[kopcicle]

RCW 9.41.220 Unlawful firearms and parts contraband. All machine guns, bump-fire stocks, undetectable firearms, short-barreled shotguns, or short-barreled rifles, or any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, illegally held or illegally possessed are hereby declared to be contraband, and it shall be the duty of all peace officers, and/or any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington, to seize said machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or parts thereof, wherever and whenever found. [2019 c 243 § 4; 2018 c 7 § 4; 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 421; 1933 c 64 § 4; RRS § 2518-4.] Effective dates—2018 c 7: See note following RCW 9.41.010. Finding—Intent—Severability—1994 sp.s. c 7: See notes following RCW 43.70.540. Effective date—1994 sp.s. c 7 §§ 401-410, 413-416, 418-437, and 439-460: See note following RCW 9.41.010.

So how many were aware that any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington (Washington state has armed "forces"??) are duty bound to seize personal (private?) property suspected of being a machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or parts thereof, wherever and whenever found?

Undetectable firearm. If it's undetectable, then isn't "whenever and wherever found" a bit rhetorical if not redundant?

Read More

 

[oremike]

RCW 38.04.030: Composition of the militia.

app.leg.wa.gov

 

[kopcicle]

RCW 38.04.030: Composition of the militia.

app.leg.wa.gov

Not to get into a pissing match with you but...

RCW 38.04.030: as it applies to the composition of the militia says nothing of officers or members of the armed forces of the United States confiscating property without due process.

Example. Non rate E-3 comes home with your son or daughter on leave and spots an 80% receiver or polymer 80 and seizes it as contraband.

Okay, without getting into they'd never see it, never make it to the door with it, cold dead hands yada yada....

According to this law they would be within their rights and duty to relieve you of said contraband on the spot without benefit of due process.

 

[Stomper]

Not to get into a pissing match with you but...

RCW 38.04.030: as it applies to the composition of the militia says nothing of officers or members of the armed forces of the United States confiscating property without due process.

Example. Non rate E-3 comes home with your son or daughter on leave and spots an 80% receiver or polymer 80 and seizes it as contraband.

Okay, without getting into they'd never see it, never make it to the door with it, cold dead hands yada yada....

According to this law they would be within their rights and duty to relieve you of said contraband on the spot without benefit of due process.

And they'd most likely be relieved of their little young E-3 testicles in the attempt….

 

[kopcicle]

And they'd most likely be relieved of their little young E-3 testicles in the attempt….

Agreed. However the point is the law is on the books.

 

[elsie]

I don't think state governments have the authority to declare the duties of federal forces. It would be interesting to see that challenged it court.


elsie

 

[Old Dog]

Just chalk that silly (and unconstitutional) RCW verbiage up to the idiots who write the bills for your state legislators. And it's not your reps or senators writing this stuff-- if you ever meet some of their young staffers and attorneys (most with zero practical life experience) that spawn this drivel, you'll see how this stuff results.

 

[User 1234]

I don't think state governments have the authority to declare the duties of federal forces. It would be interesting to see that challenged it court.


elsie

You are correct. The states cannot regulate the federal government. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/80/397/

 

[Stomper]

Agreed. However the point is the law is on the books.

So is, "shall not be infringed".

 

[oremike]

Sorry, I was answering the does Wa have a state army with yes it can or does and you are it. Oregon used to but Komrade Kate disbanded it.

 

[ar addict]

The Posse Comitatus Act Explained

The law generally prevents the president from using the military as a domestic police force.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[ar addict]

What does the Posse Comitatus Act say?

The Posse Comitatus Act consists of just one sentence: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

In practice, this means that members of the military who are subject to the law may not participate in civilian law enforcement unless doing so is expressly authorized by a statute or the Constitution.

 

[kopcicle]

Sorry, I was answering the does Wa have a state army with yes it can or does and you are it. Oregon used to but Komrade Kate disbanded it.

Np

 

[Ura-Ki]

What does the Posse Comitatus Act say?

The Posse Comitatus Act consists of just one sentence: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

In practice, this means that members of the military who are subject to the law may not participate in civilian law enforcement unless doing so is expressly authorized by a statute or the Constitution.

Yes, and No! Under Fed law, the Governor may call up the N.G. and through the senior or nominated Sheriff, WITH the states Adjunct General officer, conduct law enforcement actions as laid out by the three parties, but ultimately, the governor's powers end once the Adjunct General takes control of the situation, and they MUST seat a tribunal to handle any issues that arise!
No state, despite any laws on their books may violate this law, furthermore, unless the POTUS federalises the N.G., the authority remains within the state (s) and the court!
This is where States Preemption comes in, and also pushes the use of martial law, though great care must be taken in doing so!


All this is to say, no state can send military troops out into the wild to do ANYTHING, with out direct authority from the powers that control those troops! Any sheriff would be removed from his/her office and places under arrest for attempting to circumvent national Possi Comitas law, and any adjunct general officer would face much the same fate! Both would then face the full tribunal and be held accountable under it's authority!

 

[Ura-Ki]

You guys should really read up on the Federalist papers, specifically the Powers of Sheriff, and Adjunct General, it's an eye opener and would really help explain some things you are probably not aware of!

BTW, National Guard is not the same as Fed Troops, the States powers are limited only to N.G. personal and assets, NOT regular military, that power belongs to Congress alone, and even POTUS must go before Congress to use those assets!

 

[kopcicle]

Now you know why I posted

 

[Hooyah DeepSea]

. . . and this is part of the reason I don't live in Washington . . .

 

[kopcicle]

. . . and this is part of the reason I don't live in Washington . . .

Oregon is no less _____________ than Washington. It's just different.
The similarity arises from the heavily populated blue counties dictating to the less populated red counties. it's the same fight. In essence a geographical political joke, you have to be there.

 

[The Heretic]

I don't think state governments have the authority to declare the duties of federal forces.

Yup - pretty much this.

The state doesn't have the authority.

When I was in the USCG, I was a petty officer. As such, I was technically a federal LEO (I also had some LE training to that end while in the CG) and I gave out citations for violations of federal laws (mostly mundane things like not enough life jackets, fire extinguishers, etc. - but we also enforced drug laws, etc.).

At that point, it was not against federal law to be operating a boat under the influence, but it was against state law. However, as a federal LE, we could not enforce state laws, so we never cited anybody for operating a boat under the influence - even though we came across it regularly and really would have liked to.

Today, I am given to understand it is different; BUI is against federal law.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Yup - pretty much this.

The state doesn't have the authority.

When I was in the USCG, I was a petty officer. As such, I was technically a federal LEO (I also had some LE training to that end while in the CG) and I gave out citations for violations of federal laws (mostly mundane things like not enough life jackets, fire extinguishers, etc. - but we also enforced drug laws, etc.).

At that point, it was not against federal law to be operating a boat under the influence, but it was against state law. However, as a federal LE, we could not enforce state laws, so we never cited anybody for operating a boat under the influence - even though we came across it regularly and really would have liked to.

Today, I am given to understand it is different; BUI is against federal law.

True, HOWEVER, the USCG can only act On, or Within Navigable Waters, (Just so everyone is aware and don't get their panties in a bunch) you will NOT find the Coasties doing any law enforcement off or away from the water UNLESS it's part of a mission involving something that took place ON, IN, or AROUND the regulated waters at some point and would require a Fed Law Enforcement Intervention!

Also Note, The U.S. Coast Guard is the ONLY branch of the U.S. Military with Law Enforcement Powers, PERIOD!
None of the investigative offices of any branch have that authority in the civilian world,, only the U.S.C.G!