collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Seattle Police Confiscate First Firearm Under New “Mental Health” Law  (Read 7058 times)

Offline Stein

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 13005
  • Location: Arlington
Agreed, but I do believe the notice has to be served by a LEO, at least according to this:

https://www.courts.wa.gov/forms/documents/XR_ERPO%20Brochure_2017.pdf

Offline Stein

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 13005
  • Location: Arlington
I just looked it up and the police are required to make two attempts at serving it and then are allowed to mail it or publicize it (in the paper?).  They will attempt to serve it to whatever address or location the petitioner lists on the paperwork.

If someone was real cranky, they would submit the petition while you were out of town for a couple of days.

Anyway, the courts will eventually get around to judging the constitutionality of this order, it is in place in several states.

Offline Fl0und3rz

  • Forum Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Posts: 51553
  • Location: E. WA
Agreed.


Agreed, but I do believe the notice has to be served by a LEO, at least according to this:

https://www.courts.wa.gov/forms/documents/XR_ERPO%20Brochure_2017.pdf

Not so.  That is essentially a sales pitch that presents best case scenario for petitioners.

Read the actual RCW.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=7.94&full=true#7.94.060

Pay particular attention to RCW 7.94.070 Service by publication or mail and RCW 7.94.040 Hearings on petition—Grounds for order issuance, Section (1)(d), citing RCW 7.94.050 Ex parte orders.

The situation I described is accurate.  And the burden of proof is the lowest possible, a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt or even the intermediate standard of clear and convincing evidence.

This was all covered in the discussions of I-1491, which the media and left gladly obfuscated or mislead the public. 


If you were setting out to design a system ripe for abuse, you could not do a better job.   Don't take my word for it.  Review RCW 7.94.120 Penalties and RCW 7.94.140 Liability.


As I said, the nod to due process is a sham.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Taxidermy Issues....HELP! by MADMAX
[Today at 05:16:43 PM]


Spot lock in the salt? by GWP
[Today at 02:45:08 PM]


Seeking packer OnCall for early archery unit 328 Naneum/Colockum by dreadi
[Today at 02:09:41 PM]


GPW Trail Closures by Kingofthemountain83
[Today at 01:49:27 PM]


Pre season Archery SALE by BigJs Outdoor Store
[Today at 01:32:46 PM]


Good Fishing Guides in Puget Sound by hiway_99
[Today at 01:17:16 PM]


49 Degrees North Early Bull Moose by B4noon
[Today at 10:42:06 AM]


Challis/salmon idaho packstrings? by 2MANY
[Today at 10:05:30 AM]


AUCTION: Custom knife by Alden Cole by teanawayslayer
[Today at 09:29:24 AM]


More Kings! by blackpowderhunter
[Today at 08:50:08 AM]


Good day of steelhead fishing! by snit
[Today at 08:10:42 AM]


Bonaparte Lake by AntlerHound
[Today at 07:48:39 AM]


Honda BF15A Outboard Problems - FIXED! by pickardjw
[Today at 07:39:38 AM]


KODIAK06 2025 trail cam and personal pics thread by kodiak06
[Today at 06:27:05 AM]


New to bear hunting by JimmyHoffa
[Yesterday at 10:39:22 PM]


Best all around muzzy (updated) by riverrun
[Yesterday at 09:17:25 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal