• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Response from Intercity Transit

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

Gotta chew some on my reply


I apologize for the incident. The security personnel involved was new and did not fully understand the rules and policies regarding open carry of firearms. We have provided instructions to this person and are reminding our supervisory and other personnel of the rules.
I hope you will use discretion in openly carrying a gun. It is certainly your right to do so but I also hope you recognize it can cause alarm, particularly in a public gathering space. We will do our best to follow the law regarding this issue.

Mike Harbour
General Manager
 

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,522
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
The guy in Vancouver that is going to court of warranting alarm probably wishes the washington supreme court rulings applied there too.
 

WCrawford

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
592
Location
Nashville, Tennessee, United States
imported post

amzbrady wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
The guy in Vancouver that is going to court of warranting alarm probably wishes the washington supreme court rulings applied there too.
Ok, you just confused me. Why would a ruling by the WA State Supreme Court not apply in Vancouver, WA?

Or are you thinking it is Vancouver, BC? In Canada, iirc, they can't carry, period.
 

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,522
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

WCrawford wrote:
amzbrady wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
The guy in Vancouver that is going to court of warranting alarm probably wishes the washington supreme court rulings applied there too.
Ok, you just confused me. Why would a ruling by the WA State Supreme Court not apply in Vancouver, WA?

Or are you thinking it is Vancouver, BC? In Canada, iirc, they can't carry, period.
No, the guy that got busted at Albertsons for open carry, the cops said someone said he warranted alarm. I was just commenting on the irony how he got busted by a Washington agency (police) and will now have to go to courtfor having a firearm in a holster when it has been established in a court that what he did is not illegal.
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,544
Location
Washington
imported post

amzbrady wrote:
WCrawford wrote:
amzbrady wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
The guy in Vancouver that is going to court of warranting alarm probably wishes the washington supreme court rulings applied there too.
Ok, you just confused me. Why would a ruling by the WA State Supreme Court not apply in Vancouver, WA?

Or are you thinking it is Vancouver, BC? In Canada, iirc, they can't carry, period.
No, the guy that got busted at Albertsons for open carry, the cops said someone said he warranted alarm. I was just commenting on the irony how he got busted by a Washington agency (police) and will now have to go to courtfor having a firearm in a holster when it has been established in a court that what he did is not illegal.
Not in a citable opinion though.
 

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,522
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

Tawnos wrote:
amzbrady wrote:
WCrawford wrote:
amzbrady wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
The guy in Vancouver that is going to court of warranting alarm probably wishes the washington supreme court rulings applied there too.
Ok, you just confused me. Why would a ruling by the WA State Supreme Court not apply in Vancouver, WA?

Or are you thinking it is Vancouver, BC? In Canada, iirc, they can't carry, period.
No, the guy that got busted at Albertsons for open carry, the cops said someone said he warranted alarm. I was just commenting on the irony how he got busted by a Washington agency (police) and will now have to go to courtfor having a firearm in a holster when it has been established in a court that what he did is not illegal.
Not in a citable opinion though.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/19970-26.html
 

glock23

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
81
Location
Clark County, Washington, USA
imported post

I guess some people would say (not me) that two people of the same sex kissing in public could warrent alarm of familes, but I doubt he would tell them to use discretion. IMHO
 

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

glock23 wrote:
I guess some people would say (not me) that two people of the same sex kissing in public could warrent alarm of familes, but I doubt he would tell them to use discretion. IMHO

Perfect! My brain is foggy today,That's just the retort I was looking for. And it will play well in progressive Olympia :D
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours.  The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
Division 2 Appellate Court made the ruling.
 

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

Here is my reply

Thank you for your reply.

I'm sure you understand (or that your lawyers do) that someone feeling alarmed simply isn't legal cause to do anything. In this big world of ours, there are many things that make many people feel alarmed, but are perfectly legal. I have met bigots who would feel alarmed simply by seeing several black people on a bus, and sadly I've met bigoted people who fear the presence of an inanimate object as well.

As we both know, the law is on my side, as much as it is for persons of color to freely ride the bus, for homosexual couples to hold hands or kiss on the bus, or for people in wheelchairs to get priority seating. Just as you would not tell an african american to use discretion as to where they sit on a bus, I expect you would not tell any other law abiding passenger to use discretion when engaging in lawful activities.

As I mentioned, had my bus not been subject to delay due to mechanical difficulties, I would have been most annoyed. Instead I'm content with being somewhat annoyed as I was not inconvenienced beyond waiting for a bus I would have had to wait for anyway. In matters of civil rights, there is no trying to follow the law; there is simply following the law.

I trust that in the future, IT will use better discretion in removing passengers from vehicles, and will consider the alarm and stress such unfortunate passengers may feel for being singled out for no legitimate reason. I would appreciate written assurances on IT letterhead regarding the training and steps taken to prevent this sort of thing from happening again.

Thank you again for your time.
 

John Hardin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
684
Location
Snohomish, Washington, USA
imported post

joeroket wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
Division 2 Appellate Court made the ruling.
Not Casad? Cite plz?
 

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,812
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
imported post

glock23 wrote:
I guess some people would say (not me) that two people of the same sex kissing in public could warrent alarm of familes, but I doubt he would tell them to use discretion. IMHO
+1

Hey you stole my idea:p I've been keeping that one to use against some anti who gets on my case too (but they never seem to). Perfect parallel like SV said, I personally don't approve of such behavior, I'd rather they didn't do it, but I would not disrespect anyone's right to do so, and the only way social stigmas on such things have waned is because people exercised their right to do so.
 

Ruby

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
1,201
Location
Renton, Washington, USA
imported post

NavyLT wrote:
You can inform him that causing alarm is not illegal or any fault of yours. The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that carrying a firearm in a holster does not WARRANT alarm in reasonable people, therefore, those that it causes alarm in, according to the Supreme Court are unreasonable.
Cite please. Where can I find this information? I know someone who was erroneously told by a Seattle LEO that if someone becomes alarmed by OC that the OCer can be detained, arrested, asked to cover it up, etc. I would like to print this out for this person and put an end to the argument. Thanks!
 

.45ACPaddy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
1,001
Location
Lakewood, WA
imported post

It's a simple matter of the wording of RCW 9.41.270

"warrants alarm for the safety of other persons"

Nowhere does it say "causes"
 
Top