From: harryb@phred.UUCP (harry barnett)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Displaying a weapon (was Bicycles are Vehicles)
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:08:39 GMT
Reply-To: harryb@phred.UUCP
Distribution: seattle
Organization: Physio-Control

In article 2562@kopachuk.uucp, dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman) writes:
>In article <BzKozD.7BC@plato.ds.boeing.com> prang@plato.ds.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja) writes:
>>
>>When I lived in Colorado, there was a precedent-setting case there.  I
>>forget how the situation started (whether the guy was verbally or
>>physically threatened, or just did it for the hell of it), but the police
>>arrested a man for displaying a weapon in public.
>>
>>The judge found for the defendant... he had a concealed weapons permit.
>>The judge ruled that the permit gave him the right to display the gun when
>>he felt it was necessary.
>>
>
>But, can't *anybody* (except maybe a convicted felon) carry an
>*unconcealed* gun?

It depends.  It varies from state to state.  A CCW permit will cut out
a LOT of harassment from law enforcement authorities, in many, but not
all, places in Washington.  Local grandstanding politicos set some
idiotic policy to enforce non-existent laws, and Joe Citizen has to
spend a lot of time in court and a lot of money to get the Gov's hands
slapped by a judge for violating their civil rights.  Joe Citizen
doesn't have a lot of money to do this, while the politicos have the
bottomless pit of Joe Citizen's taxes to harass Joe Citizen.

rec.guns posts from time to time an all-state table of gun
regulations.  You might be surprised at how long and complex the table
is.  Look at this for some insight as to why this simplistic view is
hazardous to your freedom from arrest in any given set of
circumstances.

>The whole point of a concealed weapons permit
>is not that it entitles you to carry a gun, but that you can hide
>the fact that you are carrying a gun from others.

A CCW Permit does not immunize you from being charged with Displaying A Weapon
in Washington.  And the whole point of a CCW permit is to establish the
State's authority to regulate who can carry weapons, i.e., it IS the
point that the State has the right to say whether or not you can carry
a gun, in spite of popular myth to the contrary.  Once the State has
established that it has the right to PERMIT citizens to carry a weapon,
it follows that the State has established that it has the right to
REFUSE TO PERMIT citizens to carry a weapon.  Fortunately, in
Washington, the State's, (and local jurisdictions) right to do the
latter is pretty explicitly constrained by the Washington Constitution
and Washington Statutes.

>For instance,
>you supposedly cannot carry a gun in the glove compartment of your
>car (at least this is how most cops interpret it) unless you have 
>a concealed weapons permit - otherwise, you have to have it on the
>seat beside you or in a gun rack, etc., where it is *plainly*visible*.
>Has this law changed?

No, this law hasn't changed.  In Washington, THIS IS NOT THE LAW, and
as far as I know it never has been.  A CCW Permit is a permit to carry
a concealed weapon *ON YOUR PERSON*.  This does NOT include carrying it
in a glove compartment.  In fact, a good way to get a misdemeanor
charge slapped against you is to volunteer to a troop who is disposed
to harass you that you have a gun in the glove compartment.  Your CCW
Permit will not help you, and you're almost certainly going to have the
gun seized and, depending on the local jurisdication, it will probably
disappear into a bureaucratic black hole.  "Oh, we're going to ignore
your right to have it returned to you." "What, you have an order from a
judge to ordering us to return it?  Well, then, we've, let's see, oh
yes, we've destroyed it [lost it, whatever].  That's right.  We've destroyed it.  So
sorry.  Bye."

ON THE SEAT BESIDE YOU IS *NOT* ON YOUR PERSON.

In fact, in Washington, a common way for the LEO's to seize your weapon
is to stop your motor vehicle on some pretext, e.g., speeding, and
during the course of the conversation, say "OBTW, do you have a weapon
in the car?"  Yes, you reply.  "Where is it?"  If you do NOT reply, "On
my person," you will probably say "Goodbye gun."  Now this has been
ruled to be an illegal search by the US Supreme Court, i.e., a LEO may
NOT routinely inquire regarding your possession of a firearm UNLESS he
has probable cause to suspect that you are in violation of some law in
which the firearm figures.  A routine traffic violation has been
explicitly ruled by the US Supreme Court NOT to be such a violation.
However, in the gun grab feeding frenzy, many LEO's and judges have
found they can probably get away with ignoring the US Supreme Court,
the Washington Courts, and plain as day Washington law, because Joe
Citizen won't have the funds to fight the matter:  *They know* cheaper
for Joe Citizen to blow off $400 than to spend $4-5000 getting their
constitutional rights enforced.  So, what do they do?  Whatever they
can get away with.

Cynical?  No.  Realistic.

A good layman's reference on Washington Gun Laws is Marty Hayes,
"Understanding Washington Gun Laws" (or a title quite close to this).

Stay low.  Keep moving.  Watch your six.

>-- 
>David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
>dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
> ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      | "Zinc & cadmium plating stops |  /   ____/ / 
>CompuServe: <DEAD>        |  rust & acts as a lubricant!" |

harryb@phred

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brittanius (shocked):  Caesar, this is not proper.
Theodotus (outraged):  How?
Caesar (recovering his self possession):  Pardon him, Theodotus:  He is
a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and islands are
the laws of nature.

		--Caesar and Cleopatra, Act II, George Bernard Shaw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------