Posts

Washington State Firearms Attorney In Spokane

Several years ago, we were in Federal Way, Washington. Our law practice focused on firearms related issues in Washington state. The concept of a firearms attorney in Washington state was fairly new. The Federal Way Mirror asked me to write a column in the local newspaper. The Mirror published Firearms lawyer column for four years. The column was about local law enforcement and current legal issues of concern to gun owners. We also wrote about firearms training and why seeing more of our neighbors trained and carrying guns is a good thing for public safety, families and neighborhoods.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Washington State Firearms Attorney. We have been in business for almost 30 years. Our firm focuses on firearms rights- our primary focus for over 12 years. The Law Office of Mark Knapp PLLC has been operating in the Spokane area for five years. We handle most criminal defense cases, including domestic violence cases, and restore gun rights across the state of Washington. Many states restore the right to possess by expunging the record of conviction.

We can represent you to vacate a conviction. Vacating a conviction, however, only makes your conviction unavailable to the public via your Washington State Patrol WATCH criminal history. To get your gun rights restored, we will need to file a Petition to Restore the Right to Possess Firearms. The Petition is the way we will normally proceed if your felony or domestic violence conviction is in Washington state.

We cannot help with federal convictions because the process for dealing with federal convictions has never been funded by Congress. You should talk to an attorney in the state where your conviction was entered if your conviction was entered in another state.

 

Please call (253) 202-2081 or (509) 237-5464 for a confidential phone consultation regarding any question.

 

FBI Clears Way for Restoration of Gun Rights After DV Conviction in Washington State

Until recently, anyone that had been convicted of a Fourth Degree Assault determined to be domestic violence in Washington State was in a tough position because the NICS did not recognize a Restoration of Rights for Washington state non-felony domestic violence convictions. State and federal laws on the subject of domestic violence and gun rights are very technical and you should schedule a legal consultation in order to look carefully at any convictions that you think resulted from allegations of domestic violence.

Many Washington State citizens with misdemeanor DV convictions who had their right to possess firearms restored were getting NICS denials. The intent of Congress has long been that a state court order restoring firearm rights should remove federal prohibitions on possessing firearms. Read more

Restoring Your Right to Keep & Bear Arms

You can petition the court to restore your right to own firearms by representing yourself or obtaining an attorney. We can provide some links that will help you to obtain the forms but there are some pitfalls. For instance, at the present time, the federal government (BATF & NICS) will not recognize rights restored by the Washington Courts if the underlying conviction was for domestic violence.

Read more

King County Lawyers Discuss Washington State Gun Law

https://www.kcba.org/news…D=article21.htm

Reprinted from King County Bar Association Bar Bulletin (September, 2011).

I read KCBA President Joe Bringman’s message in the Bar Bulletin (August, 2011 President’s Page). Many lawyers have the impression that the KCBA is taking political positions that conflict with the conservative principles which animate more than a few lawyers. The President’s comments related to state preemption of local gun control efforts might be commendable as an opinion piece or an expression of his personal opinion. Nevertheless, the fact that he was writing as President to KCBA members raises the issue of whether the President’s Page is an appropriate venue from which to advocate taking a questionable position regarding RCW 9.41.290. Read more

Preemption: Washington Cities Violate State Gun Law

Attorneys for various municipalities around Washington State have issued legal opinions that RCW 9.41.290 “only applies to the regulation of firearms themselves” and “excludes regulations that only secondarily affect firearms… that do not embody a punitive regulation”. The Washington State Attorney General’s Office issued a legal opinion last week that thoroughly rebuts such opinions based on Cherry v Metro and another case that dealt with certain narrow issues applied to a venue for a gun show leased from the City of Sequim, washington. Read more

Otis McDonald & the Second Amendment in Chicago

The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) may have decided the most important Second Amendment case in history on June 28, 2010. A previous landmark 2008 gun case, DC vs. HELLER, held that the Second Amendment guarantees a personal right of self-defense. Yes, the U.S. Constitution actually means what the Founding Fathers thought they meant when they drafted it! The Bill of Rights only began to be applied to the states by means of the 14th Amendment, enacted after the Civil War to protect newly freed citizens from the tyranny of Southern regimes that deployed de jure force of law and de facto intimidation to perpetuate slavery.

In MCDONALD VS. CHICAGO, the Court acknowledged that the 14th Amendment aims at prohibiting firearms restrictions enacted against Blacks and enforced by armed white mobs often via the noose-end of a rope! Otis McDonald, the 76 year-old African-American Plaintiff in the case, is a neighborhood activist targeted who boldly he stood up to thugs that lay claim to the streets of Chicago. Read more

DC vs. Heller

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed DC v Heller in a five to four landmark decision last year. Justice Scalia firmly placed the Court’s decision, which knocks down Washington DC’s ban on firearms within the bedrock of the Founding Fathers’ original intentions; i.e., the decision sets forth a principle scorned by tyrants over the centuries. It is in the people that the power of governmental force resides. The government’s use of deadly force ultimately derives from an individual’s duty to protect herself or himself, one’s family and neighbors.

The fact that the discussion of self-defense is usually framed in terms of rights is, perhaps, unfortunate in that Americans can easily become exhausted by the perpetual yapping about “rights“. We have welfare rights, immigration rights, First Amendment right to purvey obscenity. The “right” to keep and bear arms is first of all a duty. Many states, especially in the Eastern U.S., still have laws on the books requiring men of certain ages to have a military weapon and suitable ammunition in specific quantities in order to be ready to perform militia service: Read more

The Assault on Guns in Washington State: Sen. Kline’s Weapon Ban Hearings

Linda Pillo, Bellevue Washington’s police chief, was named chief in January, 2008. She bested five other candidates from around the nation. Pillo, 53, is the first woman chief in Bellevue. She told the local Seattle news media that running a police department was “something she never expected to do when she started police work on Mercer Island after graduating from Washington State University in 1978”. She aspired to be a supervisor, however.

At the Senate hearings on January 26, 2010, she showed the world how she rose so quickly through the ranks after joining the Bellevue department in 1986 and rising from lieutenant to captain, major, deputy chief, chief and now as a chief that chops wood and hauls water for left-wing trial lawyers like Adam Kline. Pillo sat in front of Washington State Senator Adam Kline’s judiciary committee and called everyone’s attention to studies conducted by the International Association of Chief’s of Police (IACP) and the anti-gun, Chicago-based Joyce Foundation. The two groups jointly sponsored “THE GREAT LAKES SUMMIT ON GUN VIOLENCE”. Read more

Did Clinton Gun Ban Make Fort Hood Vulnerable to Jihad Attack?

The Washington Times recently ran the following editorial:

Last week’s slaughter at Fort Hood Army base in Texas was no different – except that one man bears responsibility for the ugly reality that the men and women charged with defending America were deliberately left defenseless when a terrorist opened fire.

Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.

After talking to a veteran and reviewing some forums on such matters, it seemed that the assertions in the article may not bear up under scrutiny. For example: Read more

Emergency Preparedness: King County Violating Washington State Gun Rights

How many years have we listened to the talking class bemoan the fact that most of us know more about what happens in the Middle East than we know about our own local governments? Suddenly the internet and cable TV have created an explosion of engaged citizens and the political class is worried! In between Tea Parties and disrupting Town Meetings, citizen activists all over the State of Washington are investigating county and local governments that have enacted emergency power provisions that violate RCW 9.41.290, the Washington State preemption statute.

For example, the City of Yakima just amended certain local laws that were in violation of the state preemption law. Then we discovered to our dismay that the Council had retained the following: Read more