 |
 |
It is currently Fri Apr 19, 2024 4:42 pm |
|
All times are UTC - 8 hours |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forum rules
Nothing contained in this section shall be construed as legal advice. All members and guests are advised to perform due diligence in regards to laws and legal actions.
|
Page 1 of 2 |
[ 28 posts ] | Go to page 1, 2 Next |
| Print view | Previous topic | Next topic |
Use of suppressors illegal in Kirkland?
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Site Supporter   Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251 
|
"or who uses any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm, is guilty of a misdemeanor."
http://www.codepublishing.com/wa/kirkla ... #11.41.055 |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:08 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Olympia Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 Posts: 16044 Real Name: Steve
|
How cute. A law on the books that is voided through state preemption on firearms. Tell them to go fuck themselves.
_________________ "I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." - William Buckley, Jr. "...steam, artillery and revolvers give to civilized man an irresistible power." -Perry Collins |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:12 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Admin   Location: Renton, WA Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 Posts: 52039 Real Name: Steve
|
Well, it sounds like it . . . .
Kirkland needs to get that shit straight. State pre-emption trumps that city law. _________________ Steve Benefactor Life Member, National Rifle Association Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation Patriot & Life Member, Gun Owners of America Life Member, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Legal Action Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition Member, NAGR/NFGR Please support the organizations that support all of us. Leave it cleaner than you found it. |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:13 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: I-5 /512 Joined: Thu Dec 8, 2011 Posts: 15231 Real Name: chris
|
Kirkland Municipal eat this!
 _________________  |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:35 pm |
|
|
|
 Location: kirkland Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 Posts: 2999
|
Well shit, I live in Kirkland.
I do not have any suppressors on my guns. |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:46 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
MadPick wrote: Well, it sounds like it . . . . Kirkland needs to get that shit straight. State pre-emption trumps that city law. So.... the carve out in preemption for cities is as follows: rcw 9.41.300 wrote: (2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances: (a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. Such laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I, section 24 of the state Constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others; and It is interesting that the Kirkland code mentions USE of the suppressor, not possession. If you look at .300 it clearly talks about places (i.e. no shooting zones). Saying you can't discharge a certain type of device seems to be outside that allowance. Someone (preferably who lives in Kirkland) should take a run at this with a letter to the city attorney. Is Interlake Sporting Assoc within the Kirkland city limits? I could see a great argument for members there to challenge this, in case we can't find someone who lives there. Not a requirement, but I always think someone who is impacted by the code is a better candidate to make the case. I just came across this while looking at something else. I don't have a suppressor, yet. |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:48 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: Olympia Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 Posts: 16044 Real Name: Steve
|
It's probably a relic back from the time prior to preemption. I've seen that same boilerplate in other city laws. Make like most civilized people are planning to do with 594 and ignore it.
_________________ "I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." - William Buckley, Jr. "...steam, artillery and revolvers give to civilized man an irresistible power." -Perry Collins |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:52 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
kf7mjf wrote: It's probably a relic back from the time prior to preemption. I've seen that same boilerplate in other city laws. Make like most civilized people are planning to do with 594 and ignore it. I don't think it should be ignored. |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:59 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: White Center Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 Posts: 6489
|
Welllll...I am a member at Interlake and this is some interesting stuff. With that said...if I recall correctly, the range is technically part of Redmond, even though the address says Kirkland.
And...yes, I know several members (myself included) who own/shoot suppressors at Interlake. |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:03 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: Olympia Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 Posts: 16044 Real Name: Steve
|
ANZAC wrote: kf7mjf wrote: It's probably a relic back from the time prior to preemption. I've seen that same boilerplate in other city laws. Make like most civilized people are planning to do with 594 and ignore it. I don't think it should be ignored. What? The law that tramples the rights of law abiding citizens and or the one about suppressors? Either way, Kirkland's is unenforceable, and per state preemption law automatically void. _________________ "I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." - William Buckley, Jr. "...steam, artillery and revolvers give to civilized man an irresistible power." -Perry Collins |
| Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:18 pm |
|
|
|
 Site Admin  Location: Olympia, WA Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 Posts: 38308 Real Name: Dan
|
ANZAC wrote: It is interesting that the Kirkland code mentions USE of the suppressor, not possession. It's just mirroring old state RCW. The old RCW never prohibited the possession of suppressors, you just couldn't shoot em! A quick letter to the City Atty saying they should update that portion of their code to match the revised RCW is all it takes. |
| Fri Nov 14, 2014 6:24 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Marysville, WA Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 Posts: 11581 Real Name: Mike
|
kf7mjf wrote: ANZAC wrote: kf7mjf wrote: It's probably a relic back from the time prior to preemption. I've seen that same boilerplate in other city laws. Make like most civilized people are planning to do with 594 and ignore it. I don't think it should be ignored. What? The law that tramples the rights of law abiding citizens and or the one about suppressors? Either way, Kirkland's is unenforceable, and per state preemption law automatically void. You just have to understand ANZAC's penchant for picking fly shit out of ground pepper. The rest of us know it's an unenforceable law, even Kirkland, but apparently ANZAC needs something else to 'promote' now that the election is over. _________________ "I've learned from the Dog that an afternoon nap is a good thing" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother" - William Shakespeare |
| Fri Nov 14, 2014 6:25 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Graham Joined: Sun Sep 4, 2011 Posts: 2222
|
@deadshot
Dude...shhhh! Let them argue. It might be entertaining to watch, and it will keep them out of other threads for a little while.  - This post should not be construed as inflammatory, or suggestive of feeding trolls.  _________________ What is a Waterbouget? It is that yellow thing in the middle, below my user name. |
| Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:33 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: White Center Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 Posts: 6489
|
I confirmed - ISA is part of Redmond, not Kirkland.
|
| Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:19 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Admin Location: Renton, WA Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 Posts: 52039 Real Name: Steve
|
Benja455 wrote: I confirmed - ISA is part of Redmond, not Kirkland. OK, you're fine then. http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Redmon ... l#9.24.025 Redmond Numbnuts wrote: 9.24.025 Dangerous weapons — Use, possession, concealing, sales, manufacture. (a) It is unlawful for a person knowingly to: (1) Manufacture, sell, possess, purchase or carry any instrument or weapon of the kind usually known as a blackjack, slingshot, sand-club, metal knuckles, chako sticks, nunchuka, throwing stars, clubs or other similar instruments which are designed or constructed to inflict bodily injury or property damage; (2) Manufacture, sell, possess, purchase or carry any spring blade knife, balisong knife or any knife the blade of which is automatically released by a spring mechanism or other mechanical device, or any knife having a blade which opens, or falls, or is ejected into position by the force of gravity, or by an outward, downward, or centrifugal thrust or movement; (3) Furtively carry with intent to conceal any dagger, dirk, pistol or other dangerous weapon; or (4) Use any contrivance or device for suppressing the noise of any firearm. _________________ Steve Benefactor Life Member, National Rifle Association Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation Patriot & Life Member, Gun Owners of America Life Member, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Legal Action Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition Member, NAGR/NFGR Please support the organizations that support all of us. Leave it cleaner than you found it. |
| Tue Nov 18, 2014 5:42 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
[ 28 posts ] | Go to page 1, 2 Next |
|
All times are UTC - 8 hours |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests |
| You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|