Man cited for open carry in Vancouver Wa


PDA






Runningman
March 27, 2010, 12:18 PM
http://www.katu.com/news/local/88892207.html

VANCOUVER, Wash. - A Vancouver man was cited Friday for wearing his pistol in a grocery store even though it’s legal to carry a gun in Washington and Oregon.

The incident is part of a growing controversy over what’s called the “Open Carry” law and highlights the debate over people openly wearing firearms in public places.

While police said it is legal in Washington and Oregon to openly carry firearms in public places, Kurt Kirby was ticketed by Vancouver Police on Friday outside an Albertsons on East 4th Plain after shopping with his loaded semiautomatic pistol holstered on his waist.

The owner of the nearby martial arts studio called 9-1-1, and according to the police report, the owner was alarmed because he teaches small children and was concerned for their safety.

The police officer cited Kirby under the law that says it is wrong to carry a weapon if it “manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.”

If you enjoyed reading about "Man cited for open carry in Vancouver Wa" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Starcheck55
March 27, 2010, 12:40 PM
F that

kenno
March 27, 2010, 01:29 PM
Double F that, I'd sue the a hole that owns the Martial Arts Studio, how does loading groceries constitute a threat?

Flintknapper
March 27, 2010, 01:40 PM
No doubt... a Tae Kwon Do......dojo, pffffffffft!

MathurinKerbouchard
March 27, 2010, 01:43 PM
I'd sue the Martial Arts Studio owner for defamation of character!

Roccobro
March 27, 2010, 02:29 PM
I hope the judge throws it out. Sure hate their laws to change down the road due to a tiny precedence from a citation....

Justin

KBintheSLC
March 27, 2010, 03:07 PM
The owner of the nearby martial arts studio called 9-1-1, and according to the police report, the owner was alarmed because he teaches small children and was concerned for their safety.

The police officer cited Kirby under the law that says it is wrong to carry a weapon if it “manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.”

So, the simple fact that the martial arts guy was a jumpy wuss and called 911 over a holstered handgun, the gun owner is somehow in violation of the law... even though OC is perfectly legal? I call BS... this won't hold up in court.

TCB in TN
March 27, 2010, 03:31 PM
Would sue the PD, hard and fast. Even if the idiot called it in, the PD should know better!

straitnate14
March 27, 2010, 04:02 PM
I guess the marial arts guy wants a fair fight hand to hand lol?

SharpsDressedMan
March 27, 2010, 04:08 PM
Seems like some kind of infringement to the keeping and BEARING of arms.......

Usagi
March 27, 2010, 05:08 PM
Very odd... most martial arts instructors I know LOVE shooting.

Buzzard
March 27, 2010, 11:36 PM
Read this in the paper a couple of days ago. The article has a few errors on the part of the authors, as they obviously didn't do any research about firearms before writing it. Somewhat surprising, really; their outdoors writer is a top-notch guy. That aside, here's what the paper had to say about it...

http://www.columbian.com/news/2010/mar/23/prosecutor-reviews-man-with-gun-case/

Like the whole Marlin closing mess, its best if you get a quality local source. Devil's in the details.

NWCP
March 29, 2010, 10:32 PM
I am at a loss to understand the need for open carry in a state that has a shall issue law for CPLs. If I'm hunting, or on my own property is one thing, but pushing the issue could do more harm than good. That's especially true in Washington State where the lefties own the Governor and Legislature. The only thing we have going for us is a long history of CPL and a conservative State Attorney General. I see no need to open carry when obtaining a CPL is reasonable and easily done. The defendant and his wife apparently are on a crusade to confront police over the issue. Not a real wise move with a Governor that would like nothing better than to remove our right to carry concealed, or own guns for that matter. Seems to me we have to pick our fights wisely and avoid looking like crackpots. He hung around the shopping center waiting to be noticed is the way it looks to me. Had he conducted his business, packed up his groceries, the little lady and gone about his merry way this wouldn't have been an issue. JMHO :scrutiny:

xx7grant7x
March 30, 2010, 12:55 AM
But it's an established legal right in this state, just one uncommon in practice. So a legal laws' lack of use makes it useless? I think if someone wishes to carry concealed or openly lawfully, then that is their right and choice to make. JMHO

Nick5182
March 30, 2010, 01:00 AM
I'd fight it if I was him. That's ridiculous. That's like ticketing someone for going the speed limit or driving sober. Ridiculous.

cyclopsshooter
March 30, 2010, 01:41 AM
damn, that is just a few blocks from my uncles house

Gouranga
March 30, 2010, 08:06 AM
On the surface, with the information in the article, this sounds like total garbage. He was not breaking any laws. He was openly carrying in a state which allows it. That being said, it says a lot to me that he was cited and his wife was not. If the cops were strictly anti-gun they could have found a charge for her too.

What it sounds like was he was aggravating things. He was standing around, with no apparent purpose, outside a mall with a gun on his hip. Personally, in this day and age, I would be tempted to call the police to check him out. You cannot be to careful. It is one thing if he is engaged in business, or going about his routine. I have seen plenty of armed (concealed and otherwise) people in the area, just going about normal business not making a spectacle of themselves. The article makes it sound like he was flat out loitering and doing that will alone draw attention.

So now the cops come in, he is standing there, loitering, apparently he is cooperative with police (based on info in the article). The police probably assume he is there to stir stuff up for a cause and find a reason to cite him.

I carry concealed. I do it plenty. Because I have a weapon on me that can take a life, I deliberately avoid (within reason) situations that can increase my chances of needing to use it. I also avoid coming off as a radical with a gun.

If anything, I think OC and CCW folks need to protest our rights by engaging in everyday normal business just like anyone else. Perfect example, I was at Bob Evans the other day with 2 of my kids, and I was surrounded by kids and family all around me. I had a .40 holstered in my waistband. I was no different than anybody else. I represented no threat, drew no more attention to myself than anyone else.

IMO that is the image we need to send to the anti's and those on the fence. This guy seemed to just be out to kick the beehive a bit. While he was within his rights to protest and I do not think (based on the info in the article) he was breaking any laws, I also do not think he was being smart in looking to shake things up and I think he does all of us a disservice in putting himself in a situation that asks for more attention.

hso
March 30, 2010, 10:36 AM
Better for General since there's no plan here.

If you enjoyed reading about "Man cited for open carry in Vancouver Wa" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!