How does the Freedom of Information act work?

If the case is closed (not active) the information should be accessible. What you need to find out is who 911 is run by in the jurisdiction (County/State/City). Then you contact them with your request. You will have to sign (not fill out, merely sign) a form for the info to be released to you (Data Privacy Act....which has caused more confusion, more paperwork, and more unhappyness, on both ends). I suspect you'll have to pay a small fee to cover the cost of the tape/CD-R it'll be put on.
It's a pretty simple process once you find out who administers 911 service. In my area it's the County. Contacting the County and asking for the info would result in you being refered to the Dispatch Supervisor (they'd give you the phone number), and then you'd contact them with your request. They'd check into the case, see if it's active, then search the data base for the info. This would (in my area) take about a week to 2 weeks to complete. Then they'd put it on tape/CD-R and you'd have it.

TBO
 
I turned in my complaints against the city earlier today. I then walked to the courthouse and turned one in against the county deputy involved as well.

The request for public records was next located at the 911-dispatch center, which is about a mile out of town. I decided to walk, (not wanting to be caught dead driving around right now... ha, ha).

Well, the dispatch center director was in and he read my request for the 911 tape. He asked if I was a defendant in a case. I told him no.

He invited me inside of the secure building so he could look up if the 911 tape was now considered public record.

We made small talk about cell phone locators during 911 calls. He voiced his concern about voice over internet 911 calls.

Getting back to my request, he stated he believed that it was public record because there was a note with it that said the case had been closed the evening of the incident. He tried getting on the phone with the city police to find out if they had any objections to releasing it as a matter of public record. He could not get a hold of the officer in charge of the case, but came to the conclusion that the tape was public record. He said, well, I’ll let you listen to the tape first and then you can decide if you would like to pay for your own copy.

After a little searching past a horse on the roadway call and others, we reached one starting out like this:

911 Operator: 911?

Caller: Yeah, I was wondering about the laws on conceal carrying a handgun?

911 Operator: Well, you should be directing your call to this agency… blah, blah, blah.

Caller: Oh.

911 Operator: So, you should ask them this question, (911 operator going for the hang-up).

Caller: But, the reason I called was that I just had a customer in my store that had a .45 stuck in the front of his pants “cocked, locked and loaded.” He wasn’t doing anything, but I was wondering about the law.

911 Operator: (Now interested). Where was he? Do you know him? What was he wearing? Did you see where he was going? You said it was cocked? We are sending an officer out now. Do you want to be contacted?

Well, plenty of reasonable suspicion of a LEGAL activity there. The 911-call was better then I thought.

I asked if there were any other calls on this incident. The director took a closer look at his computer screen, (it was a very large flat screen), trying to find another call. He said he didn’t have one. He then noticed an entry that the case had been reopened only 30 minutes earlier at 2:25 pm today. Now he was unsure of what to do.

So, he got on the phone with the city police and started asking question. I overheard as the director said, “I see no reason to not let this phone call go out as public record. What do you think?” About 30 seconds of listening, then, “Oh, I see. Yes, then this is most certainly not available for public record.”

I was trying to hold in my laughter.

He got off the phone and said request denied because there is currently an active investigation. I cannot tell you anything more.

I held in my laughter again, stood up and got ready to leave. He asked if I wanted my request for public records back. I asked him to please make his denial of public records in writing. He said he would send me a letter. I walked home.

http://fishorman.blogspot.com/
 
Btw...

How did the officer handle your gun while in his possesion - like during the "taking", the middle time, and handing it back?

Inquiring minds want to know.
 
He stepped forward, as he did he said, I'm taking your gun from you now. I stood still. He reached out and took my handgun, believe with his right hand. He then tucked it into his belt on his back side, (he did not clear it first).

I was unable to tell what else he did with my gun, he left my sight numerous times. When the gun was handed back to me it was in the same condition as when he took it, clip fully inserted and loaded.
 
What are the elements of the crime(s) of "Brandishing" or "Disorderly conduct" or "Public Nuisance" in Washington? And does the state have any laws specifically authorizing open carry? What are the laws for public transportation of a firearm there? What about local ordinances for the same?

I would have given you a ticket for brandishing, taken your gun, and let the judge decide. You were carrying a gun openly in a business which is reasonably considered to be a popular target for the hold-up man. The teller was concerned enough to call 911. Not the general information line, but 911. As soon as I got a sample of your attitude, you'd have gotten an appearance ticket so you could explain the law to the judge.

The officer didn't need probable cause to investigate you. You seem to pride yourself on your second amendment knowledge. You'd best brush up on the 4th.
 
Last edited:
FrankDrebin said:
...does the state have any laws specifically authorizing open carry?
I ask these similar questions:

...does the state have any laws specifically authorizing walking?

...does the state have any laws specifically authorizing talking?

...does the state have any laws specifically authorizing breathing?

Just because the law doesn't explicitly allow something, doesn't mean that it is illegal. I don't doubt that Fishorman had a bit of an attitude when stopped by the officer, but he was engaged in a lawful activity - of that there can be no doubt.

FrankDrebin also said:
You were carrying a gun openly in a business which is reasonably considered to be a popular target for the hold-up man.
So we should ban a lawful activity in places where criminals frequent?

Consider the possibility that if more people carried like Fishorman, criminals might choose to do their business elsewhere.
 
In the distant past, I had an experience trying to get information from a land-use commission, in Klickitat county, WA; using the freedom of information act. They never released the information to me, citing the excuse that the memo I requested was an "internal work product". It was a dodge. At the time, I suspected there were several well known excuses** that could be summoned by bureaucrats if they really didn't want to release the information. You can appeal to a court for release, and spend much time and effort, but there's no real downside penalty to the bureaucrat if they get later ordered to release the information...and chances are, the currency of the information will have passed.

At least you got a chance to view the raw data (i.e., the 911 call) before it was locked down. You won't be suprised. I'd say that the fact it was locked down, indicates someone (da's office) is watching your case.

**another tactic was, if a person requested info citing the federal statute, the commission would claim they were bound by the WA state statute; if a person cited the Wa state statute, they would claim they were bound by the federal satute; and, if a person cited both statutes, the commission would claim they were a bi-state commission (Wa and Or); and thus *no* statute would apply to them! I kid you not! And they even got a superior court judge to agree with them!
 
The officer didn't need probable cause to investigate you
Correct. He didn't need probable cause, he needed reasonable suspicion. I was using the wrong term. Either way, none was present.

What reasonable suspicion can you find in this situation?

Someone calling 911 to ask about conceal carry laws. When he is about to get hung up on he says, well, but the reason I called is I had a customer in here with a gun, he wasn't doing anything with it, just wanted to know about the law....

That provides reasonable suspicion of what crime?

Officer walks up and sees a man open carrying a handgun. What reasonable suspicion now is there?

Sorry, you cannot sight a legal activity as grounds for reasonable suspicion. Try again.

You want to sight that because I was doing this legal activity inside a Fred Meyer's store, shopping in the cosmetics with my wife, as reasonable suspicion? That's your call to make, although, it would get you a desk job for 30 days while they investigate why after I file a complaint against you.


As soon as I got a sample of your attitude, you'd have gotten an appearance ticket so you could explain the law to the judge.
You sound perfect for ANY public service job. No need to follow the law, let's pass judgement based on sex? race? appearance? attitude?

But, great job. We really need to keep people like me off the streets...
 
What reasonable suspicion can you find in this situation?

I'd guess there was some type of brandishing or improper transportation of a firearm local ordinance violated, if not a state law misdemeanor. At any rate, your whole series of posts seems to indicate that you're more into carrying a gun just for the sake of carrying a gun than for any self-defense reason. Since Washington is a shall-issue state, you could easily get a permit to carry concealed, but you'd rather carry out in the open for everyone to see, despite the fact that Washington, to the best of my knowledge, is not recognized as an "open carry" state. A good way to get yourself, your loved ones, and bystanders shot. In my opinion, you thrive on the attention you get and the frustration you cause others who are trying to do their jobs the best then can.

You sound perfect for ANY public service job. No need to follow the law, let's pass judgement based on sex? race? appearance? attitude?

Race and appearance? That's a good one. Somehow I think I know what you'd do if you operated a small business in some small town in Washington state and 3 young black males walked in wearing Tupac shirts with Tec-9's shoved in their waistbands.

Do you load and unload your gun every time you get in and out of your car? I doubt it. If you DO load and unload your gun every single time you get in and out of your car instead of just getting a CCW permit, you're just plain weird. If you DON'T load and unload your gun every time you get in and out of your car, you're in violation of the law. After getting the EMERGENCY LINE (911) call about a man with a gun, the officers at LEAST had the reasonable suspicion that you were in violation of this law: (But I'm sure you walk everywhere that you want to carry your gun, you never drive, right?)

(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

Also, I think it's well within the bounds of reasonable suspicion to detain you based on this:
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

The clerk called the police emergency line, not the general information line. I'm quite sure the dispatcher didn't go over all the BS about "I just wanted to know what the law was" when they gave the run out. More likely it was "Man with a gun at the bank". You're lucky it was the clerk and the police who spotted you with the gun instead of the hold-up man.
 
Last edited:
I'd guess there was some type of... (crime)
Sorry, but you cannot guess on this one. Only citizen's can guess. Government must act inside of the law we have surrounded them with. Reasonable suspicion needed for any of those crimes cannot be merely the fact that you witnessed a similiar legal activity.

At any rate, your whole series of posts seems to indicate that you're more into carrying a gun just for the sake of carrying a gun than for any self-defense reason.
Please... next you will rule my point invalid because of the titled I gave this thread.

Somehow I think I know what you'd do if you operated a small business in some small town in Washington state and 3 young black males walked in wearing Tupac shirts with Tec-9's shoved in their waistbands.
Actually, since I don't watch network news, and never listened to my teachers anyway, I don't have a fear when merely viewing a gun. I see a gun, (not handled in a threating manner), and I say, "I LOVE AMERICA." Whether it be the "young black male" or the 70 year old grandmother. I also thank those citizen's for the duty they perform in keeping us all safer. Of course, I could be one of the brainwashed that believe guns kill people and then whatever rights the police came and violated would be justified, (cause I wet myself when I saw a gun).

As for the rest of your comments, PLEASE, do not make the same post in different threads. (answered here:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1363334#post1363334
 
I see a gun, (not handled in a threating manner), and I say, "I LOVE AMERICA." Whether it be the "young black male"....

Yeah, right. You see 3 young black males with Tupac shirts on and shorts down around their knees with Mac-10's in their pants walk into your store in Ellensburg, Washington and you'd have one hand on the phone and one hand on your gun.

As for the rest of your comments, PLEASE, do not make the same post in different threads. (answered here:

Then don't start two threads on the same subject. You could have easily found out "how the freedom of information act works" on any number of FOIA sites, but you chose to use that question here as a thinly veiled attempt to do more expounding on another thread.

Sorry, but you cannot guess on this one.
How about posting a link to all the appropriate local ordinances then?
 
You ask ... they don't tell.

Joking aside - you should of inadvertantly dialed your own cell phone number and had it ready to "send" just before that 911 tape was played. You'd had it all in your voice mailbox.

In any case you heard the tape before "release" was denied, and you have memorized enough to put up a challenge. By memory alone you could challenge them in court over what was said - and the only way to clear it up would be the release of the tape.
 
Frankdrebin,

[RE:"Yeah, right. You see 3 young black males with Tupac shirts on and shorts down around their knees with Mac-10's in their pants walk into your store in Ellensburg, Washington and you'd have one hand on the phone and one hand on your gun."]

.... How about citing a case like this in any open carry state that you have seen? I have never seen such a thing in an open carry state. Uh... I mean the Mac-10s that is ... or anything substituted in their place.
 
Letter to Editor

Letter to editor
It has now been 2 months since Ellensburg Police responded with over 4 officers to Fred Meyers while I was shopping with my wife, legally carrying my unconcealed weapon, (Colt 1911). They detained me, took my handgun, grilled my wife and myself with questions, and attempted to get me removed from the business through store managers. I filed a complaint against Ellensburg Police shortly after the incident. Their only response to date has been the denial of my Freedom of Information Act request to get a copy of the 911-call that had started the situation. I was actually at the dispatch center and had already listened to the 911-call when it was abruptly taken out of public record by Ellensburg Police Department. What I heard in the call was an Ellensburg businessman calling to ask about the law in regard to carrying a handgun. After being directed to call another agency, the businessman told of seeing a customer with a gun and wanted to know if it was legal, stating clearly that he was not threatened or intimated by me. Ellensburg Police unlawfully turned this call into their reasonable suspicion of a crime to stop and question me. Without reasonable suspicion of a crime, the Terry stop, (the ID check), was done without legal authority. After the ID check, the continued harassment and attempt to have me removed from the store was just plain wrong. It is called the 2nd Amendment and open carrying is one of the few abilities Washington citizens have left to express this right without impairment, (apparently Ellensburg Police believe intimidation with police presence isn’t an impairment.) Moreover, with terrorism on the rise, a citizen equipped with the unique item that can adequately defend against terror should be commended.
Jason
 
.... How about citing a case like this in any open carry state that you have seen? I have never seen such a thing in an open carry state. Uh... I mean the Mac-10s that is ... or anything substituted in their place.

I just got back from AZ. I didn't see any conservatively dressed white men carrying guns in town either. Which, in my opinion, means that someone reacting with suspicion to young black guys who look like thugs who happen to be carrying because it's an unusual sight is on the same level as the police acting the same way when they see Joe Whitebread carrying when it's a rarity to see them carrying. Unless you want to consider the fact that someone who sees a young black male with a gun as a threat when a young white male isn't perceived that way is just plain racist.
 
Back
Top