Man gets escorted off of NF trail for open carrying rifle and pistol. UPDATE!!

[pianoman9701]

Wait, wait....lemme get this straight.

Some hikers were bothered by the sight of one man with a gun, politely open carrying, so they called up a whole bunch of guys with guns, body armor, trained attack dogs, and a plethora of deadly and not-so-deadly gadgets and gizmos to go mess with him?

It amazes me how often these so called anti-gun people use guns through a public servant. These people are not even anti-gun, they are anti-human rights, pro-authoritarians, who point the guns of government at anyone who makes them uncomfortable.

Disgusting.

That's the story and so far, still just a story.

[SCRUBS]

Wait, wait....lemme get this straight.

Some hikers were bothered by the sight of one man with a gun, politely open carrying, so they called up a whole bunch of guys with guns, body armor, trained attack dogs, and a plethora of deadly and not-so-deadly gadgets and gizmos to go mess with him?

It amazes me how often these so called anti-gun people use guns through a public servant. These people are not even anti-gun, they are anti-human rights, pro-authoritarians, who point the guns of government at anyone who makes them uncomfortable.

It sounds like he was also kidnapped under duress.

Disgusting.

This is the newest tactic of the anti gunners. They call 911 and use law officers to harass anyone carrying a firearm. I`ve been hearing/reading about anti gunners bragging about doing this. They think it is funny.

[pianoman9701]

Wait, wait....lemme get this straight.

Some hikers were bothered by the sight of one man with a gun, politely open carrying, so they called up a whole bunch of guys with guns, body armor, trained attack dogs, and a plethora of deadly and not-so-deadly gadgets and gizmos to go mess with him?

It amazes me how often these so called anti-gun people use guns through a public servant. These people are not even anti-gun, they are anti-human rights, pro-authoritarians, who point the guns of government at anyone who makes them uncomfortable.

It sounds like he was also kidnapped under duress.

Disgusting.

This is the newest tactic of the anti gunners. They call 911 and use law officers to harass anyone carrying a firearm. I`ve been hearing/reading about anti gunners bragging about doing this. They think it is funny.

If the police put up with that, they need new leadership. It should be common sense for the 911 dispatcher to ask a few questions. If the gun owner isn't threatening anyone, they should be reminding the idiot on the phone of our rights and let the police continue to do the things they really need to be doing. And, if this story is true (jury's still out), that department may be in for a lawsuit. Stepping on someone's 2nd Amendment rights would expose them to punitive damages, just as violating your 1st, 4th, or 5th would. More of this might be a good thing as long as the "carrier" properly presents himself. I think it would encourage the LE to stop babysitting people who are wasting their time.

[Curly]

Was this on land managed by Washington State Parks?

I believe so, but am unsure. If so, county sheriffs would have jurisdiction, if that's your concern.

By Google Maps it shows Mt. Pilchuck State Forest. So that would make it state managed.

State managed as in DNR or state managed as in State Parks?    The difference would be guns are allowed on DNR land but not allowed on State Park land.

[timberghost72]

Mt. Pilchuck trail and area is split between State Park/land and National Forest. The trail head/parking area is on NF land as is the first part of trail. Then goes into State Land. So this guy could have been on either at the time but the Sheriff and ranger are usually called for issues on the Mt. Loop Hwy. Sheriff contracts with NF. I couldn't get up there today to the ranger station to ask. The ranger station is only a few miles from trail head.

[timberghost72]

Was this on land managed by Washington State Parks?

I believe so, but am unsure. If so, county sheriffs would have jurisdiction, if that's your concern.

By Google Maps it shows Mt. Pilchuck State Forest. So that would make it state managed.

State managed as in DNR or state managed as in State Parks?    The difference would be guns are allowed on DNR land but not allowed on State Park land.

You can't carry on State Park Land? Since when?

[timberghost72]

Update,

I just got off of the phone with the Verlot Ranger Station/service center. I asked about this issue and the person I talked to said the WTA report was fairly accurate. I asked about what happened and she informed me that there was a man with an assault rifle and several hand guns on the trail. He was not threatening anyone and minding his own business. I asked if he was cited or arrested and she said no. I asked if he was escorted off the trail and asked to leave. She said yes he was asked to voluntarily leave. She then told me that is was legal to carry in NF and such (I think she thought I was an anti-gunner). The lady I talked to was very nice and forthcoming.

[Curly]

Was this on land managed by Washington State Parks?

I believe so, but am unsure. If so, county sheriffs would have jurisdiction, if that's your concern.

By Google Maps it shows Mt. Pilchuck State Forest. So that would make it state managed.

State managed as in DNR or state managed as in State Parks?    The difference would be guns are allowed on DNR land but not allowed on State Park land.

You can't carry on State Park Land? Since when?

Well, you can't shoot on State Park land......i guess you could carry for protection. 

[pianoman9701]

Was this on land managed by Washington State Parks?

I believe so, but am unsure. If so, county sheriffs would have jurisdiction, if that's your concern.

By Google Maps it shows Mt. Pilchuck State Forest. So that would make it state managed.

State managed as in DNR or state managed as in State Parks?    The difference would be guns are allowed on DNR land but not allowed on State Park land.

You can't carry on State Park Land? Since when?

Well, you can't shoot on State Park land......i guess you could carry for protection.

Shooting and carry are two different things. There's a sign at Lacamas Lake Park that reads something like "Firearms discharge prohibited".

[bobcat]

Why carry a bunch of guns in a place where it is illegal to shoot?

It's beginning to make more sense why people were concerned about this guy.

[pianoman9701]

Why carry a bunch of guns in a place where it is illegal to shoot?

It's beginning to make more sense why people were concerned about this guy.

Really? So, self defense is no longer a reason to carry? I can't even believe you made that statement.

[bobcat]

I didn't realize until now that it was a state park. Normally, people don't walk around in state parks with guns. Do you?

[pianoman9701]

I didn't realize until now that it was a state park. Normally, people don't walk around in state parks with guns. Do you?

Yes, I go everywhere with a gun. When it's someplace in the woods, it's usually open carry. Do you really go anywhere without one? That's kind of foolish, if so.

[mfswallace]

Why carry a bunch of guns in a place where it is illegal to shoot?

It's beginning to make more sense why people were concerned about this guy.

Ridiculous

Really? So, self defense is no longer a reason to carry? I can't even believe you made that statement.

Protection from what  there wouldn't be any bears, cougars or wolves in the forests would there? 

[bobcat]

I bet you're smarter than that guy though, and you probably keep it somewhat inconspicuous if you're in a public place that is frequented by people who are intimidated by guns. Seems like common sense to me.