Thread: Seattle's gun ban in parks illegal: appeals court

The state Court of Appeals affirmed Monday that Seattle's gun ban in parks is illegal, more than a year after a King County judge sided with gun-rights advocates and the city appealed.

In 2008, then-Mayor Greg Nickels enacted a rule that banned guns and "dangerous weapons" from city parks, community centers and other city properties. In 2009, the city added another rule thar banned guns from parks where kids are "likely to be present." The rules followed a shooting at the Northwest Folklife festival that injured three people.

They prompted a lawsuit by a group of gun-rights advocates who had concealed weapons permits. In February of last year, King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer ruled that state law prohibits cities from enacting laws that regulate the possession of guns.

The city then appealed. In affirming the trial court's decision, a three-judge Court of Appeals panel wrote:

Except as expressly authorized by the legislature, municipalities are prohibited from regulating the possession of firearms at city-owned park facilities open to the public.

Seattle PI

Not sure why it took lots of judges to read the law for the city. Just make the city look dumb and illiterate.

How hard is it to read and understand, RCW 9.41.290: State preemption. ?


RCW 9.41.290
State preemption.

The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.


RCW 9.41.300: Weapons prohibited in certain places

....
(2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

(a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. Such laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I, section 24 of the state Constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others; and

(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

(i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or

(ii) Any showing, demonstration, or lecture involving the exhibition of firearms.

(3)(a) Cities, towns, and counties may enact ordinances restricting the areas in their respective jurisdictions in which firearms may be sold, but, except as provided in (b) of this subsection, a business selling firearms may not be treated more restrictively than other businesses located within the same zone. An ordinance requiring the cessation of business within a zone shall not have a shorter grandfather period for businesses selling firearms than for any other businesses within the zone.

(b) Cities, towns, and counties may restrict the location of a business selling firearms to not less than five hundred feet from primary or secondary school grounds, if the business has a storefront, has hours during which it is open for business, and posts advertisements or signs observable to passersby that firearms are available for sale. A business selling firearms that exists as of the date a restriction is enacted under this subsection (3)(b) shall be grandfathered according to existing law.
.........



Seems pretty clear to me..............

Yes, but you can read the English language and comprehend same. Doesn't apply to mayors born and raised back east. I'm guessing the quality of education he got wasn't as good as those of us born here.

Originally Posted by waltermitty

Except as expressly authorized by the legislature, municipalities are prohibited from regulating the possession of firearms at city-owned park facilities open to the public.

Seattle PI

Good for Washington!

I wish Oregon would say that to Portland and Multnomah County.

Originally Posted by Nwcid

Not sure why it took lots of judges to read the law for the city. Just make the city look dumb and illiterate.

Seems pretty clear to me..............

Like the 2nd Amendment? Its pretty clear also.

Originally Posted by Father of four

Good for Washington!

I wish Oregon would say that to Portland and Multnomah County.

It would be nice for you. The difference is WA has a law agains it where OR does not.

Funny thing is that Seattle broke the law but has no punishment other then to have it repealed. If you or I break a law we end up in trouble.

SAF victory over Seattle gun ban affirms state preemption

Earlier Monday, following the announcement by the Washington State District 1 Court of Appeals that the Second Amendment Foundation had prevailed for a second time in its challenge of Seattle’s illegal gun ban in parks facilities, SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb was in a content but philosophical mood.

SAF victory over Seattle gun ban affirms state preemption - Seattle gun rights | Examiner.com

Not surprising - anyone want to bet whether Holmes continues the appeal all the way to the State Supreme Court? We could do a side-bet on whether the Court actually takes the case.

Awesome. I'll be packing when I visit Gas Works park this weekend.

Originally Posted by Nwcid

Not sure why it took lots of judges to read the law for the city. Just make the city look dumb and illiterate.

How hard is it to read and understand, RCW 9.41.290: State preemption. ?


RCW 9.41.290
State preemption.

The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.


RCW 9.41.300: Weapons prohibited in certain places

....
(2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

(a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. Such laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I, section 24 of the state Constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others; and

(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

(i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or

(ii) Any showing, demonstration, or lecture involving the exhibition of firearms.

(3)(a) Cities, towns, and counties may enact ordinances restricting the areas in their respective jurisdictions in which firearms may be sold, but, except as provided in (b) of this subsection, a business selling firearms may not be treated more restrictively than other businesses located within the same zone. An ordinance requiring the cessation of business within a zone shall not have a shorter grandfather period for businesses selling firearms than for any other businesses within the zone.

(b) Cities, towns, and counties may restrict the location of a business selling firearms to not less than five hundred feet from primary or secondary school grounds, if the business has a storefront, has hours during which it is open for business, and posts advertisements or signs observable to passersby that firearms are available for sale. A business selling firearms that exists as of the date a restriction is enacted under this subsection (3)(b) shall be grandfathered according to existing law.
.........



Seems pretty clear to me..............

Clark County is, in a few cases, stating that they can act as private property owners and ban guns from their "property" like the amphitheater at the fair grounds. I know they can ban guns under some circumstances but they have a blanket policy last I checked

Originally Posted by deen_ad

Clark County is, in a few cases, stating that they can act as private property owners and ban guns from their "property" like the amphitheater at the fair grounds. I know they can ban guns under some circumstances but they have a blanket policy last I checked

The question would be WHAT would they charge you with?

In WA while private parties can restrict firearms IF you are caught with one the worst they can do is ask you to leave. There is no criminal charge for it. IF you choose not to leave or cause some other kind of problem then there are lots of things you could be charged with.

Originally Posted by Nwcid

The question would be WHAT would they charge you with?

In WA while private parties can restrict firearms IF you are caught with one the worst they can do is ask you to leave. There is no criminal charge for it. IF you choose not to leave or cause some other kind of problem then there are lots of things you could be charged with.

But thay are using wands to check for weapons at the doors the last I heard. i don't know for sure because I won't go near the place as there is nothing being presented that I want to see/hear!!

Anybody know for sure about the search at the gates?

Originally Posted by Nwcid

It would be nice for you. The difference is WA has a law agains it where OR does not.

Oregon does have a state pre-emption law.

AUTHORITY TO REGULATE FIREARMS



166.170 State preemption. (1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.

(2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void. [1995 s.s. c.1 §1]

Originally Posted by Nwcid

It would be nice for you. The difference is WA has a law agains it where OR does not.

Funny thing is that Seattle broke the law but has no punishment other then to have it repealed. If you or I break a law we end up in trouble.

OR just has a nasty little clause in the law that allow municipalities or counties to regulate this. Outside of that the preemption statutes regarding carrying would be similar.

As far as preventing the passage/enforcement of gun laws that are preempted, adopt Florida's model of enforcement. It makes law makers much more accountable.