Seattle Hempfest

[deepdiver]

Wow, that's clear as mud. So, um, you can carry CC because it is not a music festival or because it is leased they can ban carry of all types and you will/will not be subject to arrest and misdemeanor charge?

My wife and I are hoping to visit a family member near Seattle later this year and I thought I had a pretty good handle on WA carry but now I'm a little lost in the weeds.

 

[ManInBlack]

That's very clear to this proud member of the dying conservative bread

Lol...I prefer sourdough, thanks.

 

[Metalhead47]

Wow, that's clear as mud. So, um, you can carry CC because it is not a music festival or because it is leased they can ban carry of all types and you will/will not be subject to arrest and misdemeanor charge?

My wife and I are hoping to visit a family member near Seattle later this year and I thought I had a pretty good handle on WA carry but now I'm a little lost in the weeds.

Let's be clear. Hempfest is NOT a "music festival" so it is NOT unlawful to carry there, concealed or otherwise. If you were to carry openly, you would be asked to leave and TRESPASSED if you refused. It's a trespass violation, NOT a firearms violation.

Same deal as anywhere else in the state really. Those places LEGALLY off-limits to firearms are specifically listed in law (check the WA state OC pamphlet sticky), and are very few, mostly gov't detention & bars. Anywhere else is standard private property rules. Guns are now UNLAWFUL on private property, you can't get a firearms violation for having one where it's not welcome, but you can/will be asked to leave. I imagine that's the same as MO. You'll be fine as long as you don't plan on going to any hippie music festivals. You can usually smell them far enough away that you've got plenty of warning.

 

[jbone]

Wow, that's clear as mud. So, um, you can carry CC because it is not a music festival or because it is leased they can ban carry of all types and you will/will not be subject to arrest and misdemeanor charge?

My wife and I are hoping to visit a family member near Seattle later this year and I thought I had a pretty good handle on WA carry but now I'm a little lost in the weeds.

And as you can see so are some in this state. I'm not sure why some of them even carry, the misunderstanding, bad advice, willingness to sacrifice theirs, and our right to carry over a voluntary decision to restrict others is despicable. Why are they confusing you, because they too are confused, they are not being sincere, they lack to loyalty whole. The high is most important, and will sell out gun rights to achieve the illegal high.

 

[jbone]

Lol...I prefer sourdough, thanks.

That is funny, thanks for seeing the mistake as funny. Some would just see it as the perfect moment for a crazed leftie attack.

 

[Metalhead47]

And as you can see so are some in this state. I'm not sure why some of them even carry, the misunderstanding, bad advice, willingness to sacrifice theirs, and our right to carry over a voluntary decision to restrict others is despicable. Why are they confusing you, because they too are confused, they are not being sincere, they lack to loyalty whole. The high is most important, and will sell out gun rights to achieve the illegal high.

WTF man? What's with the hate? Now everyone who disagrees with your opinion is some doped-up junkie? I don't recall seeing anyone in this thread stating any desire what so ever for the "illegal high."

 

[jbone]

WTF man? What's with the hate? Now everyone who disagrees with your opinion is some doped-up junkie? I don't recall seeing anyone in this thread stating any desire what so ever for the "illegal high."

Didn't mean to make you fly off the handle, I thought your comments where the most sensable on the topic. I guess I should have mentioned that before I got the hateful "WTF"

I don't recall seeing anyone in this thread stating any desire what so ever for the "illegal high."

It's not hard to read between the lines, pun intended!

 

[OC for ME]

Much ado about nothing. Treat them like any other anti-self -defense organization. Boycott them....unless of course, it really ia about the weed.

 

[Metalhead47]

Didn't mean to make you fly off the handle, I thought your comments where the most sensable on the topic. I guess I should have mentioned that before I got the hateful "WTF"

When you start implying people are junkies simply because they disagree with you, you can expect a few WTF's. Not hateful, shocked. And disappointed.

It's not hard to read between the lines, pun intended!

The problem with always trying to read between the lies is that sometimes....THERE REALLY IS NOTHING THERE! Just because one supports the legalization of activities that are victimless "crimes" does not mean one wishes to partake of such activities. Some of us believe that in a free society, individuals must have the right to do stupid things as long as they harm no one but themselves. Anything else is servitude.

Much ado about nothing. Treat them like any other anti-self -defense organization. Boycott them....unless of course, it really ia about the weed.

The point both you guys seem to be missing is that Hempfest, or at least the fellow who's here posting as such, IS NOT ANTI-SELF-DEFENSE! Hempfest, as an entity, is a marijuana-reform organization, NOT a gun rights/self defense organization, so no, I DON'T expect them to be out there preaching such, no more than any of the libertarian-minded folks here would be out pressing marijuana reform at a 2A rally. THESE ARE TWO COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUES! In the context of this discussion, one really has nothing to do with the other!

The real enemy here, is the city of Seattle that created the whole situation! We would find similar gun prohibitions at ANY private gathering on leased city property. Y'all are just shooting the messenger when he's on his way somewhere else!

 

[OC for ME]

<snip> The point both you guys seem to be missing is that Hempfest, or at least the fellow who's here posting as such, IS NOT ANTI-SELF-DEFENSE! Hempfest, as an entity, is a marijuana-reform organization, NOT a gun rights/self defense organization, so no, I DON'T expect them to be out there preaching such, no more than any of the libertarian-minded folks here would be out pressing marijuana reform at a 2A rally. THESE ARE TWO COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUES! In the context of this discussion, one really has nothing to do with the other!

The real enemy here, is the city of Seattle that created the whole situation! We would find similar gun prohibitions at ANY private gathering on leased city property. Y'all are just shooting the messenger when he's on his way somewhere else!

A organization promoting their issue, liberty (to smoke weed), agrees with the 'state' regarding the restriction of another liberty, self-defense, because one enumerated right may impede their pursuit of happiness. Taken in context of liberty, HempFest is no different than any other business that is anti liberty in their pursuit of happieness (profit). So, is there a distinction without a difference?

 

[jbone]

I’m shocked that I am hearing Libertarians stand up for Hemp, then condon the restriction of self defense by the Hempfest organization. Hempfest at the point falls into the same category of the Brandy Bunch.
Is that what Ron Paul really stands for? Somebody mentioned its politics bro, oh yes it is indeed!

 

[deepdiver]

Let's be clear. Hempfest is NOT a "music festival" so it is NOT unlawful to carry there, concealed or otherwise. If you were to carry openly, you would be asked to leave and TRESPASSED if you refused. It's a trespass violation, NOT a firearms violation.

Same deal as anywhere else in the state really. Those places LEGALLY off-limits to firearms are specifically listed in law (check the WA state OC pamphlet sticky), and are very few, mostly gov't detention & bars. Anywhere else is standard private property rules. Guns are now UNLAWFUL on private property, you can't get a firearms violation for having one where it's not welcome, but you can/will be asked to leave. I imagine that's the same as MO. You'll be fine as long as you don't plan on going to any hippie music festivals. You can usually smell them far enough away that you've got plenty of warning.

OK, that clears it up somewhat. We weren't planning to attend any such events anyway out there so it sounds like the rules I understood do apply except at such a gathering.

 

[Elimsitna]

I concure. Hempfest is chooseing to ban guns, and threaten tresspass against LAC's, cause they feel it helps them politically. Which is silly, since you would think they would support all rights, since they feel they are missing one.

Seattle(city of, or it's agents) can imply anything they want. It's Hempfest that's not following the law.

 

[gogodawgs]

Seattle(city of, or it's agents) can imply anything they want. It's Hempfest that's not following the law.

Can you please cite what law Hempfest is breaking?

 

[Elimsitna]

Hempfest is restricting carry during its event, which doesn't follow state preemption or 9.41.300. They arn't breaking any laws, just common sense and reason.

 

[jbone]

...Just because one supports the legalization of activities that are victimless "crimes" does not mean one wishes to partake of such activities.

I can appreciate that, my apology.

...THESE ARE TWO COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUES! In the context of this discussion, one really has nothing to do with the other!..

They are very alike, and crucial to understanding their false front, and the lack of respect for others rights they have when pushing their self serving agenda.

Yes, the city holds 50% of the partnership in citizen restriction. Someone mentioned something about what else could they do, they would have to cancel, or move it? Cancel, move it, there's a genius thought, lets move the event to a city where American rights are respected. Seattle is a epicenter of diseased anti-America thinking, and favors degenerative social movements, therefore $#@$" your gun rights, it's the perfect place to push the weed culture.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I’m shocked that I am hearing Libertarians stand up for Hemp, then condon the restriction of self defense by the Hempfest organization. Hempfest at the point falls into the same category of the Brandy Bunch.
Is that what Ron Paul really stands for? Somebody mentioned its politics bro, oh yes it is indeed!

So Does WAC gun show fall into the same category as Brady Bunch and their lease doesn't even require them to disarm you like hempfest's does they choose to do that on their own.

Ron Paul stands for individual liberty he'll get my vote over any other fascist/neocons....because that's what Romney and Gingrich are. I'll write him in other wise I won't vote. And I can bet ya if Ron Paul was running Seattle he wouldn't make hempfest sign a lease banning firearms.

 

[jbone]

So Does WAC gun show fall into the same category as Brady Bunch and their lease doesn't even require them to disarm you like hempfest's does they choose to do that on their own.

Very good point! WAC does play the nanny-state safety angle in restricting members from loaded firearms, and non-members from any firearms. And Hempfest restricts all citizens from firearms, and both clearly deserve an "F". Rob, you've made the first legimeite association in the thread.

So Does WAC gun show fall into the same category as Brady Bunch and their lease doesn't even require them to disarm you like hempfest's does they choose to do that on their own.

Ron Paul stands for individual liberty he'll get my vote over any other fascist/neocons....because that's what Romney and Gingrich are. I'll write him in other wise I won't vote. And I can bet ya if Ron Paul was running Seattle he wouldn't make hempfest sign a lease banning firearms.

I don't like any of these running for President, the best one dropped out. The problem with Paul is that he's not elevated enough to beat Hussein. I would rather have four years of a GOP top runner than four more of the America destroying Obama.

Regardless of what Paul says he’s a politician first. Like the others he’ll say what it takes to entice others into wasting their vote on him. He does not have what’s needed to compete against the silver tongued Nobel Prize winner, and like all the others has no intentions of following through with campaign promises. So logic tells me pick the best chance of defeating Obama.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Jeff you should bring the wife up one of these Sunday's Starbucks 10 am. The more the merrier.

My goal in voting isn't simply to vote Obama out but to vote my conscience, Ron Paul even though a politician has a voting record and an agenda that adhere's closer to the constitution than any of the other candidates. I don't agree with him on everything but at least he backs his viewpoints up constitutionally.

 

[jbone]

Jeff you should bring the wife up one of these Sunday's Starbucks 10 am. The more the merrier.

Yes, I think I'll free some time and do that. I'm up there some Sunday's visiting the kid, and the other Sundays somewhere in the woods hunting, or at a gravel pit shooting.