Judge's ruling ends Seattle's gun ban

Will · Feb 12, 2010

SEATTLE - A Judge has just ruled that the city of Seattle ban on guns on city property is illegal, effectively ending the ban.
What great News, Now the same thing has to take place in Snohomish County as they have the same law for county parks.

<broken link removed>

HappyRoman · Feb 12, 2010

ya..hooooo

Mutoman · Feb 12, 2010

Nice! A ray of sunshine!

Thanks for posting this Will!

Hawaiian · Feb 12, 2010

This is great news. Thanks for posting it. While I am not in Seattle, bad laws do travel to neighboring areas. Good rulings do also... I hope the Oregon polititians take notice.

simpleguy · Feb 12, 2010

Read the statement by the city's attorney......it makes me laugh.....essentially it says.....

......well we knew what the law was, we just spent all this money fighting the existing law hoping you would ignore it and legislate from the bench......

idiots!

Gray Peterson · Feb 12, 2010

I am proud to announce here, as one of the plaintiffs in the case, that the Seattle (WA) Parks Gun Ban has been STRUCK DOWN!

SAF, NRA VICTORY: COURT STRIKES DOWN SEATTLE PARK GUN BAN
For Immediate Release: 2/12/2010

SEATTLE, WA A King County Superior Court judge has ruled in favor of a lawsuit filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association, striking down a ban on guns in city parks because it violates Washington States long-standing preemption statute.

Judge Catherine Shaffer ruled from the bench that the gun ban, adopted under former Mayor Greg Nickels, violates Washingtons law, which placed sole authority for regulating firearms in the hands of the State Legislature. That law was adopted in 1983 and amended in 1985, and has served as a model for similar laws across the country.

SAF and NRA were joined in the lawsuit by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the Washington Arms Collectors and five individual plaintiffs.

This is a great victory for the rule of law and Washington citizens, said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. Greg Nickels was so blinded by his personal hatred for firearms owners and his own arrogance that he imagined the city under his control could simply ignore state law. That arrogance cost Nickels his job last year. We repeatedly warned him not to push a gun ban, but he refused to listen.

It is also a victory for the Legislature, he observed, because this case affirms the intent of lawmakers in 1983 to prevent cities like Seattle from creating a nightmare patchwork of conflicting and confusing firearms regulations. The ruling solidifies the legislatures authority and sends a message to city and county governments to stop meddling with the rights of Washington citizens.

Gottlieb suggested a review of local ordinances may now be in order, so that city and county governments can be compelled to remove old gun regulations or face legal consequences.

This ruling puts anti-gun local officials on notice that legally-armed citizens have rights, too, Gottlieb stated.

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nations oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

Report from <broken link removed> :

SEATTLE - A Judge has just ruled that the city of Seattle ban on guns on city property is illegal, effectively ending the ban.
The 2nd Amendment Foundation, the National Rifle Association, and several individuals, including a gay rights activist (From me: note this is me
they're referring to) and a Department of Corrections worker sued the City of Seattle and former Mayor Greg Nickels in October. They demanded
the city repeal a controversial ban on guns in places like parks and community centers.
The individual plaintiffs say they're suing not just on principal, but because they now "fear for their safety", according to their lawsuit.
King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer made the ruling today after the plaintiffs filed a motion for Summary Judgment and prevailed.
Mayor Mike McGinn issued the following statement:
"I am disappointed in today's ruling. Cities should have the right to restrict guns in playgrounds, pools and community centers where children are
present. The court's ruling was based on a state law, RCW 9.41.290, which preempts Seattle from regulating the possession of firearms. It's time for the state Legislature to change that law."

Dan-Dee Sales Inc · Feb 12, 2010

They will spare no expense to find away around it.

Ragingpit · Feb 12, 2010

chalk one up for the gun guys...lol

Sun195 · Feb 12, 2010

simpleguy said:
we just spent all this money fighting the existing law hoping you would ignore it and legislate from the bench......

Dan-Dee Sales said:
They will spare no expense to find away around it.

I think the City got pro-bono representation on this case.

Thank you Gray Peterson for being part of this case.

Gray Peterson · Feb 12, 2010

Sun195 said:
I think the City got pro-bono representation on this case.

Read this for a primer on "pro-bono" representation.

Finally, LCAV often promises to provide pro-bono defense of the ordinances that it lobbies for. There are two significant caveats to this promise that the Board of Supervisors should be aware of. First, in the long running battle over an ordinance banning gun shows in Alameda County (an ordinance which LCAV convinced this board to pass also at 3.53.010 Ord. 4146, 12/17/02) entitled Nordyke v. King, LCAV asked for pro-bono work to determine if that ordinance is actually constitutional as recently as only 90 days ago even though the project dates back almost 10 years. Second and most importantly, LCAV does not, to our knowledge, promise to pay for the prevailing attorneys fees. San Francisco recently lost Fiscal at. al. v. San Francisco and paid $380,000.00 to NRA attorneys. D.C. is facing a potential bill of approximately $3,500,000.00 for Mr. Gura and his team. Should the County wish to proceed with these ordinances, it should both consider the likely costs of losing as well as ask LCAV to be willing to participate in offsetting the costs should civil rights groups prevail.

The folks at Orrick Herrington and Sutcliffe are part of LCAV, so you can see where this could be a problem for the city if they appeal it. $380,000 is not a small amount of money for a city that's having budget shortfalls.....

Sawdust · Feb 12, 2010

Will said:
SEATTLE - A Judge has just ruled that the city of Seattle ban on guns on city property is illegal, effectively ending the ban.
<broken link removed>

That's great news. Congrats to my northern brothers-in-arms.

Will · Feb 12, 2010

Gray Peterson said:
I am proud to announce here, as one of the plaintiffs in the case, that the Seattle (WA) Parks Gun Ban has been STRUCK DOWN!

Report from <broken link removed> :

Gray, considering you live in Lynwood were you involved with the Snohomish county law that was just upheld and is much the same? <broken link removed>
Still wondering how it was upheld considering the local effort. All the same I expect that will change in the near future after this ruling.

twoclones · Feb 12, 2010

Hurray!!!

Gray Peterson · Feb 12, 2010

Will said:
Gray, considering you live in Lynwood were you involved with the Snohomish county law that was just upheld and is much the same? <broken link removed>
Still wondering how it was upheld considering the local effort. All the same I expect that will change in the near future after this ruling.

A lot of it depends on what Seattle is going to do. Mayor McGinn seems to be signaling from his press release that he won't appeal, but the City Attorney is saying that they're considering an appeal.

In the end, it falls onto Mayor McGinn to make that decision.

Sun195 · Feb 12, 2010

Gray Peterson said:
Read this for a primer on "pro-bono" representation.

The folks at Orrick Herrington and Sutcliffe are part of LCAV, so you can see where this could be a problem for the city if they appeal it. $380,000 is not a small amount of money for a city that's having budget shortfalls.....

Good point - I keep forgetting about the prevailing attorney's fees.

tionico · Feb 13, 2010

Wow, Seattle sure seems to have a knack for picking mayors.... also, HOW is it that one elected officer (mayor) is the deciding voice in such a decision that affects EVERYONE in the city, and many who visit? He is starting out looking like every bit the idiot Chump Change Nickels is. I wonder how far this will go before someone a LOT bigger than these pipsqueaks come down hard on the nonsense? The state legiclature has enacted, then ammended, a law, it has withstood the test of time, two state attorneys general have issued opinions going against this law..... I mean, how big is this guy's head, anyway? Maybe Seattle should secede from the rest of the state... to which I'd say Good Riddance. Maybe then they will quit running the rest of the state.

It will be interesting to see what Snohomish County does with their parks gunban, which they've just nobly decided will stand, in SPITE of the fact Rob McKenna has specifically stated that ban is also illegal. I also wonder about the signs I see in some of the East King County parks... signs with silly drawings of handguns, words that say "no firearms". One more local jurisdiction preempting state law.... or trying to.

I do think it would be grand for Seattle to have to pay their opponents, the prevailing side (our side.. YAY) for their legal costs incurred.

One more interesting thing... this did not go to a full trial. It was rejected in a summary judgement from the bench. In other words, the judge looked at the basis of the case, and decided it was so cut and dried it was not worthy of a hearing... she KNEW which way it had to go. Good work, Judge. She saved the courts, and the City of Seattle, a HUGE pot of money. I was surprised Mc Kenna didn't step in and issue an order of some sort...... telling Seattle to back down, rescind the ordinance or face other legal proceedings.

I'll bet good ol Kline is stewing in his liberal stew tonight....... and I rather doubt Queen Christine is happy about this, either. Looks good on em.

Will · Feb 13, 2010

Gray Peterson said:
A lot of it depends on what Seattle is going to do. Mayor McGinn seems to be signaling from his press release that he won't appeal, but the City Attorney is saying that they're considering an appeal.

In the end, it falls onto Mayor McGinn to make that decision.

There won't be an appeal. The state court issued a finding. The city won't spend money to appeal this. Still wondering if your active in the Snohomish county issue? Where you live you expressed you were part of the Seattle suit. I expect you are active in this local issue?

"I am proud to announce here, as one of the plaintiffs in the case, that the Seattle (WA) Parks Gun Ban has been STRUCK DOWN!"

Tactical SS · Feb 13, 2010

I'm surprised all the news stations aren't using a "military style assault weapon" as their main picture on the story.

A win for Seattle! Hopefully it becomes a landmark case for other cities.

Gunner3456 · Feb 13, 2010

I hope they appeal it all the way to the state supreme court. They'll lose, and that ruling would then apply to all cities. Right now the order is directed only at Seattle. Even though it should cause all cities to take notice, that won't necessarily happen. When a city has an ordinance like this, each individual is stuck defending himself until the big boys step up and challenge it as just happened.

simpleguy · Feb 13, 2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by simpleguy
we just spent all this money fighting the existing law hoping you would ignore it and legislate from the bench......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-Dee Sales, Inc
They will spare no expense to find away around it.

I think the City got pro-bono representation on this case.

Thank you Gray Peterson for being part of this case.

1. Yes, thank you Gray Peterson for being part of the case.
2. Pro-bono for Government? Ayah-carumba! You have to be kidding me? I would buy that if the city had a $1million annual budget, but these guys?
3. Mr. Peterson, please tell me they had to pay all your costs? I know in the end we ALL pay for government expenses, I pray people will see this is on watch of those who do not support Civil Rights. Yes, I know it's probably pie in the sky, lala land thinking, but if it's ever going to happen, this appears to be the time in history that taxes/expenses get reigned in.

Join the #1 community for gun owners of the Northwest

Free Membership Benefits

Judge's ruling ends Seattle's gun ban

Will

HappyRoman

Mutoman

Hawaiian

simpleguy

Gray Peterson

Dan-Dee Sales Inc

Ragingpit

Sun195

Gray Peterson

Sawdust

Will

twoclones

Gray Peterson

Sun195

tionico

Will

Tactical SS

Gunner3456

simpleguy

Similar threads

New Posts

Upcoming Events

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Support Our Community

Community Stats