NavyLCDR
member
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Boy-3-kills-himself-with-gun-found-in-familys-car-142616396.html
This man violated Washington state firearms law RCW 9.41.050 and a child is dead because of it:
RCW 9.41.050
"Carrying firearms.
(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or (iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle."
Under the exact same circumstances, another child dies:
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/...Marysville-police-officers-van-142212385.html
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/142385265.html
This man, however, did not violate RCW 9.41.050 because he was exempt due to RCW 9.41.060:
RCW 9.41.060
"Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms.
The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:
(1) Marshals, sheriffs, prison or jail wardens or their deputies, correctional personnel and community corrections officers as long as they are employed as such who have completed government-sponsored law enforcement firearms training and have been subject to a check through the national instant criminal background check system or an equivalent background check within the past five years, or other law enforcement officers of this state or another state. Correctional personnel and community corrections officers seeking the waiver provided for by this section are required to pay for any background check that is needed in order to exercise the waiver;"
It's going to be interesting to see who gets prosecuted for what. Who will Child Protective Services go after and who they won't. What do you think? Should police officers be subject to the same laws that us Joe Citizens are regarding firearms possession and carrying? I 100% think so.
Here's another thing to consider.... the officer cannot be prosecuted under RCW 9.41.050 because they have "completed government-sponsored law enforcement firearms training". Yet the person with no training violates the law and can be prosecuted. Really? We pay the government to train these people so they can be exempt from the laws us Joe Citizens must comply with so that when their negligence causes a death that can't be prosecuted because the law does not apply to them? I think it should be just the opposite. I think because they have had government-sponsered law enforecement firearms training that they should not only have the same threat of prosecution, if negligent, but also have a sentence enhancement because they were trained to know better.
It's also going to be interesting to see how the anti-gun crowd spins this...because in this case, if they cry and scream to take away guns from citizens they are going to have to equally cry and scream to disarm police officers.
Boy, 3, kills himself with gun found in family's car
This man violated Washington state firearms law RCW 9.41.050 and a child is dead because of it:
RCW 9.41.050
"Carrying firearms.
(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol and: (i) The pistol is on the licensee's person, (ii) the licensee is within the vehicle at all times that the pistol is there, or (iii) the licensee is away from the vehicle and the pistol is locked within the vehicle and concealed from view from outside the vehicle."
Under the exact same circumstances, another child dies:
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/...Marysville-police-officers-van-142212385.html
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/142385265.html
Girl, 7, accidentally shot by brother in police officer's van
Officer suspended over daughter's shooting death
This man, however, did not violate RCW 9.41.050 because he was exempt due to RCW 9.41.060:
RCW 9.41.060
"Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms.
The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:
(1) Marshals, sheriffs, prison or jail wardens or their deputies, correctional personnel and community corrections officers as long as they are employed as such who have completed government-sponsored law enforcement firearms training and have been subject to a check through the national instant criminal background check system or an equivalent background check within the past five years, or other law enforcement officers of this state or another state. Correctional personnel and community corrections officers seeking the waiver provided for by this section are required to pay for any background check that is needed in order to exercise the waiver;"
It's going to be interesting to see who gets prosecuted for what. Who will Child Protective Services go after and who they won't. What do you think? Should police officers be subject to the same laws that us Joe Citizens are regarding firearms possession and carrying? I 100% think so.
Here's another thing to consider.... the officer cannot be prosecuted under RCW 9.41.050 because they have "completed government-sponsored law enforcement firearms training". Yet the person with no training violates the law and can be prosecuted. Really? We pay the government to train these people so they can be exempt from the laws us Joe Citizens must comply with so that when their negligence causes a death that can't be prosecuted because the law does not apply to them? I think it should be just the opposite. I think because they have had government-sponsered law enforecement firearms training that they should not only have the same threat of prosecution, if negligent, but also have a sentence enhancement because they were trained to know better.
It's also going to be interesting to see how the anti-gun crowd spins this...because in this case, if they cry and scream to take away guns from citizens they are going to have to equally cry and scream to disarm police officers.
Last edited: