For Washington State Open-Carriers

[Shane Not Sean]

While that title excludes me from the equation, loss of gun rights that seemingly affect only a few is still a loss of gun rights.  Maybe one day I will want to open carry (for whatever reason) on the west state capitol grounds.  As of Wednesday, I am not be able to do that.  Gov. Inslee signed into law SB5038, which is essentially two open carry prohibitions.  I thought the NRA's headline alert about this new law was apropos: 2nd Amendment Banned In 1st Amendment Spaces.

 

First, you cannot knowingly open carry a firearm (or other weapon) on your person or in your vehicle while you are knowingly at any permitted demonstration.  CPL carriers are exempted (that's me).  Nor can you open carry within 250 feet of the perimeter of the permitted demonstration if you have been advised by law enforcement to leave (because you were open carrying).  However, if your private property is closer than 250 feet of the perimeter of the permitted demonstration, then you can open carry within 250 feet of the perimeter (because you are on private property that you either own or lease).  I am not making this up.

 

Second, as mentioned at the top of this post, you cannot knowingly open carry a firearm (or other weapon) while knowingly being in the west state capitol campus grounds, in any buildings on the state capitol grounds, in any legislative office, or in any place where a public legislative hearing or meeting is happening.  And fear not, all those buildings are listed in the new law (just so you can't say you didn't know).

 

The bill's preamble states that this is "AN ACT Related to prohibiting the open carry of certain weapons..."  Of course that begs the question, which weapons are they prohibiting?  Maybe it's just those infernal assault weapons we hear so much about from people who know nothing about firearms.  But once you get past that preamble and into the language of the new law, "a firearm or other weapon" is what they have just prohibited.  And "weapon" is defined as "any firearm, explosive...or any weapon of the kind usually known as slungshot, sand club, or metal knuckles, or any knife, dagger, dirk, or other similar weapon that is capable of causing bodily injury and is commonly used with the intent to cause death or bodily injury."  Note that it says "commonly used with the intent to cause death or bodily injury."  It does not say that its most common usage must be as a weapon, just that it is commonly used as a weapon.  As a criminal defense attorney, I have seen many things that were not invented to be a weapon that do actually (and quite commonly) get wielded as such - most recently, a shovel. 

 

The closing words of the ACT's preamble states that the legislature, in passing this new law, is "declaring an emergency."  That is a reference to the legislature's justification for this infringement, and they wait until the very end to tell you that "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately."  Would that they viewed the burning of our businesses and vehicles in the summer of 2020 as a threat to the public peace, health or safety. 

 

Violation of this new law is a gross misdemeanor, punishable by a maximum of 364 days in jail and a $5,000 fine.

 

Shane Not Sean

WA Team SASS

[Nickel City Dude]

Is a brick like the ones used by the BLM rioters considered a weapon?