Read this! Silencer rights imposed!!!!!!!

[Outrider]

Did you ever use the suppressors and would there be evidence of that on them?

He could have used them in a place where they are legal to use or bought them used so evidence of past use is not dispositive.

Did you ever tell the guys you were speaking with you had planned to use them/ had fired them?

I would hope that he didn't, but I believe his lawyer's advice would be to not answer these types of questions in a public forum. It does not advance his cause at all.

If he never mentioned that kind of thing, it means nothing about what he had done or was going to do. It doesn't exonerate him.

And if he did mention something of the sort, it's damning.

 

[wired]

In Washington the police have to witness the silencer being used. Its not enough to have them in proximity to a weapon or even that they have residue in them. They have no case. He MAY get his stuff back intact but he won't be successfully charged with a gross misdemeanor.

 

[Wheeler44]

you and your friends were just asking to have this happen. bringing silencers that are illegal to use on a firearm to a public shooting spot in the presence of firearms(some of which are threaded to accept said silencers i would ASSUME) is just redundant.

I fixed that one for ya...o' course you what that makes the assumer..

do you expect the cops to believe that you were just going to hold the silencer up by itself and make quiet pew pew noises?

Why not

seriously.....i know the law is ridiculous but its there none the less. this is just a prime example of what can happen When a law enforcement officer doesn't know the law.

I fixed that one too.

next time i would just leave the state to shoot them, or just leave them at home since you are openly inviting arrest, and confiscation of them by bringing them shooting.

Next time you are free to do that....

......even if you're "not" going to actually use them. of course we all know you were never going to break the law by using them. you just brought them along because you could right? sure

I am not quite sure what upsets me more..

The cops that don't know the law

Or..
The shooters that had to call the cops...

Or..
The quote that I fixed.......

If the quoter carries concealed, I hope that they only carry in their own home....not a bank....or a church....or anywhere near a school...or Heaven forbid, a tall building with a vantage point....or a mall....because that would be "redundant"???????

 

[dunes450r]

I fixed that one for ya...o' course you what that makes the assumer.. Why not I fixed that one too. Next time you are free to do that.... I am not quite sure what upsets me more..

The cops that don't know the law

Or..
The shooters that had to call the cops...

Or..
The quote that I fixed.......

If the quoter carries concealed, I hope that they only carry in their own home....not a bank....or a church....or anywhere near a school...or Heaven forbid, a tall building with a vantage point....or a mall....because that would be "redundant"???????

in order of your responses:
#1: if you own a suppressor and not a threaded firearm, or a QD type that attaches to the muzzle you are an absolute moron. therefore i put good faith in the OP owning both

#2: Why not? WHY NOT? you take a suppressor to a shooting spot and after the cops supposedly confiscate it you keep shooting and you expect someone to believe he was going to hold it up and make fake shooting noises? PUHHHLLLEASE, not even bad cops are that stupid

#3: since you infer that LEO's don't know the law it simply reinforces my point of not taking unnecessary risks that give no actual chance to gain
anything

#4: i live in state that graciously allows us to have our cake and eat it too(legally)

#5: comparing to this to carrying concealed legally is just a redundant comparison. now comparing this to CC'ing on a university campus is a much better comparison. while it is clearly written(at least in the state of oregon) that no state funded organization will interfere with the legalities of CC'ing. most(if not all) universities have there own codes that violate oregon law and restrict a CCW on their campus. now you can CC on campus and risk getting caught, arrested, expelled, and having you firearm confiscated even though the state laws make what you were doing legal, or you can just leave the gun at home and save yourself a headache and a whole load of potential problems that gain you absolutely nothing.



to the OP: for what reason, or what were you going to gain from taking your suppressors shooting with you even if you weren't going to actually shoot them?

 

[wired]

to the OP: for what reason, or what were you going to gain from taking your suppressors shooting with you even if you weren't going to actually shoot them?

Your'e questioning his intent. Intent doesnt matter for this specific infraction. What does matter is that to further a successful prosecution the police officer has to actually witness the crime in action. Since that is not what happened he will not be prosecuted. Since no crime was committed it is also likely he will get his cans back especially since he has retained a lawyer. When the ATF does finally get involved it won't be on the side of the police.

 

[dunes450r]

Your'e questioning his intent. Intent doesnt matter for this specific infraction. What does matter is that to further a successful prosecution the police officer has to actually witness the crime in action. Since that is not what happened he will not be prosecuted. Since no crime was committed it is also likely he will get his cans back especially since he has retained a lawyer. When the ATF does finally get involved it won't be on the side of the police.

i'm not going for intent, or to point a finger at his response to say that he was going to break the, i'm really just curious why he brought them. nothing more nothing less

 

[wired]

i'm not going for intent, or to point a finger at his response to say that he was going to break the, i'm really just curious why he brought them. nothing more nothing less

His intent was to use them. Just like its my intent to use mine when i go shooting. His problem was going to a crowded public shooting area. This is what clear cut and forest service roads are for.

 

[cwegga]

i'm not going for intent, or to point a finger at his response to say that he was going to break the, i'm really just curious why he brought them. nothing more nothing less

Maybe they live in his range bag and he just threw it in the truck with everything else. I know lots of people want to assume that the OP was going to use them, but how hard is it to imagine a bunch of stuff that gets taken along shooting every time whether it is in Oregon to legally use the suppressors or in Washington where he can't. Have a bag with suppressors, cleaning kits, sight adjustment tools, eyes and ears, targets etc. throw it in the truck along with the guns for the day and go...

 

[dunes450r]

Maybe they live in his range bag and he just threw it in the truck with everything else. I know lots of people want to assume that the OP was going to use them, but how hard is it to imagine a bunch of stuff that gets taken along shooting every time whether it is in Oregon to legally use the suppressors or in Washington where he can't. Have a bag with suppressors, cleaning kits, sight adjustment tools, eyes and ears, targets etc. throw it in the truck along with the guns for the day and go...

this makes sense and there isn't anything wrong with it. it just doesn't seem like thats the case, so instead of just thinking he was going to use them i asked how they ended up there, either consciously bringing them along, or as you described

 

[Wheeler44]

if you own a suppressor and not a threaded firearm, or a QD type that attaches to the muzzle you are an absolute moron.

Again an assumption....there are many good reasons why one could possess one and not the other...

therefore i put good faith in the OP owning both

But not in his intentions.....
I could answer each point with logic.......but I can't make anyone logical.. or less cynical...

About the concealed carry thing........there have been laws broken with firearms in each of the establishments I mentioned.....Why would you carry in a bank, liquor store, mall, university or tall building if you weren't going to shoot someone?....

I know that it is hard to see someone else's point of view....but that don't automatically make yours right....

 

[SquatchWorks]

I'm sure the OP drives to Idaho or Oregon to shoot them... Like I do!

 

[The B]

there's multiple reasons for owning a suppressor and not owning a firearm capable of accepting them. same reason a person might own an SBR upper but doesn't yet have an SBR lower- his buddy DOES have an SBR lower. you can assume he's gonna run the upper on his title I lower, but if he's a law-abiding citizen (which most of us are) then no, he wont.

or he might have blown his load on the cans and has to save up a while longer to get an aftermarket threaded barrel. or maybe he's a stickler for barrels and is waiting for availability for the one he wants. or maybe he got broke and SOLD his threaded-barrel pistol, because NFA items are the LAST things you sell when you're broke.

etc, etc, etc. non LEO-civilians make assumptions like this- but cops know better. cops run into waaaay too many situations that might seem like too much of a coincidence, but in fact actually are just coincidence, to make assumptions. so unless this deputy only had 3 months service under his belt, he didn't make any assumptions about the OP's intent... he didn't care. he was just wrong about the law and his level authority on the matter.

 

[jonathon]

I got an idea.. rather than speculate how about the original poster go and get a copy of the report, scan it, and post it? If this happened, there is definitely paper... and the party involved most definitely can get a copy.

 

[Bhowe]

I got an idea.. rather than speculate how about the original poster go and get a copy of the report, scan it, and post it? If this happened, there is definitely paper... and the party involved most definitely can get a copy.

I filed for a Public Record Request last week.

 

[Bhowe]

this makes sense and there isn't anything wrong with it. it just doesn't seem like thats the case, so instead of just thinking he was going to use them i asked how they ended up there, either consciously bringing them along, or as you described

I'm not sure any of that matters. I have been reassured by just about everyone except a judge at this point (and a couple of Sheriff's Deupties) that no laws have been broken and there is no grounds to hold our property.

Does't matter why you have them or where. There is no law that says they have to stay at home, or only be taken with you to an out of state event, or even not have them with you in the general area shooting is taking place.

Really shouldn't even matter if we did intend to use them or not or even if they had been used (which was never the issue, some of them have had thousands of rounds through them and).

 

[ch139]

Still.

Enquiring minds want to know...

WHY did you have your suppressors with you?

 

[Wheeler44]

From this thread at another forum;

Relying on well-defined Supreme Court precedent, the Tenth Circuit and its sister courts
have consistently held that officers may not seize or search an individual without a specific,
legitimate reason. See Terry, 392 U.S. at 21; Fuerschbach,439 F.3d at 1204-6 (holding that a
seizure without a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity "would violate the most minimal
Fourth Amendment standard"); Jones v. Hunt, 410 F.3d at 1228 ("Where no legitimate basis
exists for detaining [an individual], a seizure is plainly unreasonable.");

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=501435&page=2

and this;

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

 

[zeezee]

Before I called a lawyer I would call the ATF they would be more help and get it done faster. Especially if you inquire about the legality and violation of your constitutional rights.

Always call a lawyer first, remember your miranda rights which in part say "anything you say can and will be used against you". Had it been me I would have been on the phone with a lawyer the second the cops let me go but wait I digress. As soon as you were pulled over and the sheriff started asking questions, I would be civil, I would ask if I was under arrest, if not under arrest I'd politely refuse to answer any more questions until I was with legal counsel and get in my car and leave. Let him confiscate anything he wants, ask for a receipt, offer to follow him to the station better yet call a lawyer and have the lawyer meet you at the station. You have rights, exercise your rights or loose them.

 

[SquatchWorks]

Still.

Enquiring minds want to know...

WHY did you have your suppressors with you?

WHY NOT????

They are legal to possess in Wa

 

[ch139]

Didn't say they weren't legal in Washington. I'm just curious as it doesn't seem like a wise decision. OP is coming on a public forum looking for advise/sympathy. Its not all adding up in my head. I can think of a few reasons he might have brought them with him, if it's not in there, I'd like to know.

I'm stupid and forgot I had them with me ...They're suppressors, Class III weapons, you don't "forget" about them. If you do, maybe firearms aren't the hobby for you, ping pong is lookin more yer speed.

Trying to sneak off into the woods and use them (breaking the law). Also unwise. Not something I'd condone and not someone I'd want to associate with; probably shouldn't be allowed on the forum.

Looking for confrontation. "Because I can!" Again unwise and not the kind of individuals that perpetuate responsible gun ownership. Again, not someone I'd want to associate with; probably shouldn't be allowed on the forum.

They took them and said they would be forwarding it to the prosecutor who would do the actual filing of charges. Then they left and we continued shooting without incident.

None of this adds up.