Northeast Washington Police Chief Says He Won’t Enforce I-1639 Gun Control Restrictions

If you look at the map above, you’ll see that Ferry County in northeast Washington isn’t one of the counties that voted for billionaire-backed I-1639’s California-like gun control laws. But the initiative — no matter how questionable the decision to include it on the 2018 ballot may have beenpassed last week by almost 20 points in the Evergreen State.

Republic is a small town in Ferry County. And Republic’s chief, Loren Culp, believes that I-1639’s provisions are unconstitutional. Those provisions include universal background checks, a 10-day waiting period for semi-auto rifles, “safe storage” requirements, raising the age to buy a semi-auto rifle to 21, and classifying virtually all semi-auto rifles as “assault weapons.” And he has promised not to enforce the new law.

chief loren culp republic washington i-1639

courtesy facebook.com

iFIBER ONE has talked to Chief Culp and asked him what parts of I-1639 he thinks are a problem.

“All of them,” said Culp. “I pretty much disagree with the whole thing and all it will do is restrict law-abiding citizens. It won’t stop criminals from committing crimes.”

Culp’s additional commentary regarding the issue suggested that he is mainly averse to the portion of the law which places age restrictions on the purchase of semi-automatic rifles.

“They can vote, they can serve in the military, but they’re not allowed to buy firearms,” Culp said. “How can you tell an 18 to 21-year-old who’s fresh out of the military and has been firing the most advanced weapons we have that they can’t buy a 10/22 rifle?”

Good question. As for that “assault rifle” designation . . .

“Assault rifles don’t exist,” said Culp. “Assault is an action and it’s the person behind the rifle who commits an assault if they use it that way, but it’s not the rifle that commits the assault.”

We also inquired with Culp about any other law enforcement agencies whom he has been in contact with that might be considering a similar response to I-1639 in their own jurisdictions.

“With something as blatant as this, I don’t need a bunch of other law enforcement agencies to stand behind me,” Culp explained, adding that he has not had any discussions with fellow departments or offices of the law about the matter.

Culp is trying to get the Republic city council to back him on this and has written a proposed city ordinance he hopes will come up for a vote soon.

A. The Republic City Council declares that all federal and state acts, laws, orders, rules and regulations past, present or future, in violation of the U.S. and/or State Constitutions are not authorized by the said Constitutions and violate the true meaning and intent as given by the Founders and Ratifiers and are hereby declared to be invalid in the City of Republic, shall not be recognized by the City of Republic, are specifically rejected by the City of Republic and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in the City of Republic.

B. No agent, employee, or official of the City of Republic, or any corporation providing services to the City of Republic shall provide material support or participate in any way with the implementation of federal or state acts, orders, rules, laws or regulations in violation of the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1 Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution.

Culp’s refusal to enforce unconstitutional limits on an enumerated civil right is reminiscent of what many downstate Illinois counties have done in declaring themselves sanctuaries from the state’s gun control laws.

You can read the chief’s full proposed ordinance here.

 

comments

  1. avatar Kyle says:

    always good when SOMEBODY can figure out how to read that little document that is the basis for our heavily incompetent and bloated government.

    1. avatar Francis G Affolter Jr says:

      God Bless that man he gets it, every time some idiot uses a firearm to do harm, those stupid people blame law abiding citizens. We need more good level headed people like this man!

  2. avatar Auto Lode says:

    Imagine a young married couple around 19 years old just had their first child and are forced to live in remote wilderness or remote farming areas like Ferry county etc and they cannot own a long gun for home protection and survival. The charlie manson types are rejoicing !

    If my son or daughter lived out there the first house warming gift would be a casserole and a 7.62 NATO rifle

    1. avatar Mark says:

      7.62 NATO for home defense? Hmm, a wee bit overkill in my opinion. 5.56 mm is fine. And I own plenty of AR-10s and SCARs, but always thought of them more as “end of the world” type rifles rather than for a routine home invasion. I guess if you live in the boonies with no one around however, than you could rock a battle rifle during a break in. It would be most epic for sure.

      1. avatar Auto Lode says:

        lol have you seen Ferry county ? It’s in the wild to say the least very beautiful hunting and fishing area but “home” in Ferry county means many thousands of acres and not just 2 legged thugs to contend with. I prefer to reach out and touch unwanted guests long before they decide to breach my gate or fenceline.

        I prefer a 12 gauge for my inner “home” lol but now have way more 7.62 than 5.56

      2. avatar Kyle says:

        You assume your defending against people.

        in that part of the world, there are far worse problems then people. ‘Bears’ is more than a nickname for Highway patrol.

      3. avatar arc says:

        AR10, 16″ barrel. Can utilize short stock techniques for additional mobility. This is if I didn’t grab my pistol first.

      4. avatar Matt says:

        5.56×45 for home defense? Hmm, a wee bit overkill in my opinion. .38spl is fine. And I own plenty of whatevers, but always thought of them more as “end of the world” type rifles rather than for a routine home invasion. I guess if you live in the boonies with no one around however, than you could rock a whatever during a break in. It would be most epic for sure.

        So, did you realized how much of a Fudd you sounded like? The choice of caliber is nobody’s business but the gun owner. I personally got nothing against poodle shooters. If they float your boat then have at it.

    2. avatar Art out West says:

      I believe under I-1639, 18-20 year olds can still purchase shotguns, lever, pump, and bolt action rifles. They can’t purchase semi-auto rifles.I-

      Don’t get me wrong. The law is horrible, stupid, immoral, insane, arbitrary and capricious, and unconstitutional. I just want to accurately describe what it does. If I was 19, newly married, had a baby, and livid in the boonies (near Republic), I’d just buy a pump shotgun or lever action rifle for defense. 30-30 would handle most threats.

      1. avatar Old Fur Trapper says:

        I purchased my first rifle, a Marlin M49, semiautomatic .22 cal., at 16 with money I earned. Living in the rural areas like you proposed would also necessitate the purchase of a semiautomatic .22 for dispatching varmints, hunting food, and defense. Using a shotgun on small game certainly has been a widely accepted method. I’ve used one many times for that and taking birds. But a shotgun at close distance damages more meat and leaves you picking shot out of your meal. The same rifle is perfect for teaching other family members and children how to shoot without the adverse effects a shotgun or heavier caliber rifle may cause. And they are a lot cheaper to shoot!

      2. avatar Owen King says:

        I do believe that lever action is classified as semi-automatic.

  3. avatar GunnyGene says:

    It’s always the overpopulated “urban” areas that come up with crap like I-1639.

    1. avatar Ams says:

      It’s been a while since I have been back that way, when did Spokane become east Tacoma?

  4. avatar L says:

    Some of the quotes from this Sheriff are so wholesome you could frame them. Wish more thought like him.

    1. avatar don says:

      Now that Sheriff has some common sense. Thank God we have the electoral college other wise the urban areas on the east/west coast would control the entire country.

      1. avatar Joe in NC says:

        This plus 100. The electoral college was designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority. I cringe every time I hear some puke on tv say “our democracy” when we live in a constitutional republic.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          “…we live in a constitutional republic.”
          Venezuela is a constitutional republic.
          So is North Korea (at least in name).

          Being a republic with a constitution doesn’t describe a country very well. It only says there’s a paper somewhere that has the principles the government is supposed to be based on. Venezuela is a good example of just how little that can mean when the leadership decides to interpret the constitution in a way completely different from the way the writers intended (sounds familiar, unfortunately).
          While we are a constitutional republic, that fails to say what kind of country we are, especially when the term also includes countries that bear little resemblance to the U.S.

    2. avatar Bill Wright says:

      Is he the Sheriff of Ferry County or the City of Republic Chief. Article was not clear.

      1. avatar Jim B says:

        Republic is the seat of Ferry county. The sheriff of Ferry county is Ray Maycumber. Loren Culp is the chief of police of Republic. I used to hunt there a lot. The people there have more in common with the people across the border in Idaho than the people in Seattle.

        1. avatar Art out West says:

          The people in Yakima, Wenatchee, and Tri-cities have more in common with Idaho than they do with Seattle. The people in Republic have more in common with rural Montana and Wyoming than Seattle.

    3. avatar Mueller says:

      Many do, the problem is you mostly hear about the cops who screw up.

  5. avatar ollie says:

    When California, Oregon and Washington leave the US in a couple of years, we need to make sure that it’s done on a county by county basis. Those counties that want to stay can stay.

    1. avatar HP says:

      That’s a great idea, I want the same done when New York and New England opt to leave the US as well. Upstate NY gets to become part of the Midwest. That’s who we are culturally anyway.

    2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      Ollie……Since I believe in treating people equally, I think that when these states vote to secede then the federal government should attack these states and burn their cities attack and rob the citizens and declare martial law. This would male Lincoln proud. Even though the constitution says this is legal to secede this is what should happen.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        The Constitution says no such thing. At best leaving the Union would be subject to the same rules as joining it although I can see Congress voting coastal California of the Island

        1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

          TDIINVA…… Better read it again ! Also buy and read the Federalist Papers.

  6. avatar DD says:

    This will not end well.

    1. avatar Defens says:

      Perhaps. If it doesn’t end well for the appropriate group, then we need more folks like the police chief holding to their oath of office.

  7. avatar former water walker says:

    Great…Illinois has dozens of counties giving a big middle finger to the state. Sanctuary counties. One of the few bright spots from the recent election was a dozen added… good luck in the wild NW!

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Such a cool concept-sanctuary cities/counties/states from common sense gun craziness. When can we expect a little company producing select-fire rifles, feds can KMA?

  8. avatar Cloud says:

    This is the problem with mob rule. You have a majority of the counties voting no but it passes anyway because people in the cities want to rule over the rest of us.

    Oh and democrat Eric Swalwell from California just threatened to nuke Americans who don’t give up their AR15’s.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/16/eric-swalwell-if-gun-owners-defy-assault-weapons-ban-the-government-has-nukes/

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      wow..just wow.

      It’s come to this?

      1. avatar Kyle says:

        in a word…

        YES!

    2. avatar Ash says:

      “Don’t be so dramatic. You claiming you need a gun to protect yourself against the government is ludicrous. But you seem like a reasonable person. If an assault weapons ban happens, I’m sure you’ll follow law.”

      How can we expect cowards to take us seriously? There is no way he can see people defending their God-given rights by force.

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        Note that Swalwell also said that common ground could be found.
        The problem is one that the Dems all seem to have: their idea of common ground is, “You do what I want, and we will have that in common.”

    3. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      “Oh and democrat Eric Swalwell from California just threatened to nuke Americans who don’t give up their AR15’s.”

      This is *good* news!

      As ‘People Of The Gun’ who *love* to spout off in comment sections, we *must*, every time this idea is floated in the news, to comment LOUDLY there that this what we want them to do.

      Go full psycho. They will think they have the public’s support, and will push for it.

      Expose them for what they are to the fence-sitters, and get them on *our* side…

  9. avatar HP says:

    A bunch of upstate NY Sheriffs refuse to enforce Cuomo’s SAFE Act. Funny, tyranny doesn’t work so well when the enforcement arm of government doesn’t want to play.

    1. avatar 4freedom says:

      Research the very low compliance rates in NY and CT after those laws passed. The anti-gun idiots and their mouthpieces in the media would prefer you not know about that side of the story.

      1. avatar Pat says:

        That’s why I am annoyed when some trash cops on TTAG and really generalize and dramatize things. Most cops do not want to take our guns, people focus on that one incident and they forget there are thousands of cops/non cops interactions daily.

  10. avatar MLee says:

    My local gun store….Sharp Shooting here in Spokane, the owner is one of the people who joined in and is suing over I-1639. It really is a joke that it passed.
    Stupid people in King county voted for it and it passed with big numbers in that county alone and that overrides the wishes of the rest of the state.

    That really SUCKS! That process is just plain wrong. It’s manipulating the system.
    Essentially, any blowhard billionaire can get virtually any law passed they want. It just takes money.
    That is wrong no matter how you paint it.

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      “It really is a joke that it passed.”

      It’s no joke, and you had better stop treating it like a joke.

      They *will* enforce it, at a time of their choosing, and the way they want.

      And you won’t be the one laughing then…

      1. avatar MLee says:

        @Geoff “Mess with the bull, get the horns” PR
        The process they used to get it passed is laughable. Don’t play fuc—- words games with me. I live here! I had a vote no I-1639 yard sign, did you? I did all I could do. The law is a joke. The process is a joke. The end result isn’t an actual joke, no. I have that figured out and don’t need your 2 cents worth. FAH

        1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

          ” I have that figured out and don’t need your 2 cents worth. FAH”

          To bad. You got it anyways. ‘FAH’ in return…

          *kiss* 😉

  11. avatar 4freedom says:

    Bravo Chief Culp.

    Well this is what you get when the anti-gun idiots have lots of money to throw at a mostly well intended coastal population that doesn’t know enough – if anything – about firearms, existing laws, and criminals.

    Part of me says let these knuckleheads keep passing laws like this. Sooner or later one will wind up before the SCOTUS. Before a very different SCOTUS than just a few years ago and they will discover just how foolish this was. Can’t wait to watch Bloomberg and crew crying and wailing as their useless and unconstitutional laws get smacked down. Till then the land of freedom is just to your east, it’s called Idaho.

  12. avatar ROBERT Powell says:

    all you have to do is look at the queers,communists, marxists, and just plain idiots that are running the show here on the LEFT coast.fur-traders,poop-pounders,and jackasses that have no clue what sex they are make the decisions for the entire state.from the dogcatcher to the governor there isn’t one brain that dosn’t have a grub worm infestation..

  13. avatar Stuart says:

    Sometimes I wish all the States had their own version of the Electoral College. It would give the less populated counties a more equal voice in elections

  14. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    I will assume there are approximately 1000 city police Chiefs and elected sheriffs in the state of Washington. And yet only one of them in leadership is willing to stand up for the Constitution?
    Wow.
    I’m glad you get 1 out of 1000.

    1. avatar FD says:

      Just because you did not get informed of something doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. What makes you believe TTAG verified with all jurisdictions and their law enforcement agencies in the State of Washington?

      1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        Perhaps TTAG is just slow in reporting that %50 of Washington State law enforcement has announced they are not going to enforce this law?????

        You can certainly hope for that.

  15. avatar Arc says:

    Will vote for this man if he ever wants to run in Texas.

  16. avatar michael says:

    i am a proud democrat but i-1639 is bullshit, everyone has the 2nd amendment rights to bear arms and protect themselves and their family!!

    1. avatar ‘liljoe says:

      That’s like saying I’m sticking to my strict diet, except for the daily dozen donuts I eat.

      If you are a proud democrat you are for gun control, it’s in the platform. If you are for 2A freedom then you are not a proud democrat, maybe a confused one… and you are definitely not for the 2A.

      You may be independent who votes Democrat? I just wouldn’t be proud of that 🙂

      1. avatar RA-15 says:

        LILJOE well said. There is no middle ground. One is either a true 2nd Amendment POTG. Or a democRAT. One can not be both , period.

    2. avatar UpInArms says:

      I’m getting more than a little tired of hearing from “pro-gun democrats.”

      The usual excuse is that they are pro-gun, but they just can’t buy in to the conservative (read Republican) agenda. They support the progressive platform, and, sorry fellas, 2A just isn’t high on the list. So they hold their noses, press the D button in the voting booth, and smugly walk away believing they are intelligent voters.

      In short, they’re just too damn smart to be single-issue voters.

      Well, 2A is NOT single-issue anymore. The anti-gun fanatics have expanded it way beyond just one right. In their frenzy to savage the second amendment, they are more than willing to savage the fourth, fifth, sixth and fourteenth amendments along the way. Its only a matter of time before the first comes under attack as well.

      All you democrats can be as progressive as you want, but when all, and mean all, of your significant constitutional rights have been stripped away in the name of “common-sense gun regulations”, well, you’re progressive agenda isn’t going to be worth sh*t.

      Wake up. The fight might be over the 2A, but the battlefield is much bigger now.

  17. avatar rt66paul says:

    If I ever leave California, that county could be on my list. I always thought that Arizona would be my state, but the heat at low elevations and water shortage at higher elevations put a stop to that. Other free states in the West have the same or other problems.

  18. avatar Hannibal says:

    Not enforcing them is one thing- along the same lines as Obama’s DOJ not enforcing immigration laws.

    But trying to write a nullification law isn’t. That side lost the civil war, Sheriff.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Seems to be working with illegal immigrants.

  19. avatar Waynefromfl says:

    They won’t even enforce thier laws against the criminal element.

    Cali, ny and Chicago won’t enforce their law’s against the criminals and gangs.

    They just perfer to blame other State s for their out of control crime.

  20. avatar RA-15 says:

    Please do not confuse N.Y.C. with upstate N.Y. yes N.Y. as a state , stinks !! Upstate has , is a different animal. There are many 2nd A . supporters in my neck of the woods , we value our constitution just as you do.

  21. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    At least someone is standing up for the constitution.

  22. avatar Jim Misaros says:

    As I’m sure everyone reading this article believes, this is just another form of division that the Libtards want to enact. Police officers on the front line understand, and know that re classifying weapons doesn’t change the Facts. I believe many Towns, Cities, and states, will choose not to follow these 2nd Amendment psychos, such as Bloomberg. How many police officers, will choose not to become Pawns in their politics.

  23. avatar Derek W Tiller says:

    I like his point about ” assault rifles”. Shouldn’t they be called “fun rifles” because that’s what they are mostly used for. Or at least “defend rifles” because that’s what most people intend them to be.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email