- Messages
- 2,072
- Reactions
- 414
Link to article is <broken link removed> .
NRA, others sue Seattle, Nickels over gun ban in parks
Four gun-rights organizations have filed a lawsuit against Seattle and Mayor Greg Nickels over the new ban on guns in city parks.
By Susan Gilmore
Seattle Times staff reporter
Four gun-rights organizations, including the National Rifle Association, are suing the city of Seattle and Mayor Greg Nickels over the new ban on guns in city parks.
They were joined by five individuals, including two Department of Corrections workers who say they need to carry their personal weapons in city parks to protect themselves against criminals.
"The city is acting illegally in putting a ban into effect," said Alan Gottlieb, with the Second Amendment Foundation, and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. "Lots of people in Seattle need firearms for self-protection."
Nickels in September proposed a gun ban in city parks, specifically to protect children. The ban went into effect earlier this month. It will affect hundreds of playgrounds, community centers, sports fields, swimming pools and water-play areas.
If someone with a gun enters one of the designated facilities, he or she will be asked by parks employees or Seattle police officers to leave. If the person won't leave, he or she could be cited or arrested for criminal trespass, according to the mayor's office.
Nickels has argued that state law does not prohibit a property owner from imposing conditions on possessing firearms on his or her property.
The city's position, Nickels has said, is that a municipal-property owner such as Seattle may impose limits on firearms as a condition of entry or use of particular facilities, particularly those where children and other young people are likely to be.
State Attorney General Rob McKenna, however, has disagreed.
In a statement released in mid-September, he said he has a history of working to protect children's safety, but "as Mayor Nickels is aware, the Attorney General's Office issued an opinion in 2008, which found that state law pre-empts local authority to adopt firearms regulations, unless specifically authorized by law."
Gottlieb said McKenna's opinion has been included as one of the exhibits in the lawsuit.
"It is an incontestable fact that the State of Washington has the exclusive right to regulate the possession of firearms in Washington," according to the lawsuit. "It is equally incontestable that cities in the state of Washington may not enact local laws or regulations that prohibit the possession of firearms on city property."
According to the state Department of Licensing, there are 238,994 concealed-weapons permits in the state, 48,838 in King County.
The gun-ban proposal would affect 26 community centers, four environmental-learning centers, 10 pools, 30 wading pools, two small-craft centers, two specialized centers, 139 playgrounds, 213 ballfields, six late-night recreation sites, three teen-life centers and 82 outdoor tennis and basketball courts.
According to the city, more than 1.8 million people visited and attended programs in city park facilities last year.
In addition to Gottlieb's group, the lawsuit was filed by the National Rifle Association, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Washington Arms Collectors.
One of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Winnie Chan, is a Department of Corrections employee who lives and works in Seattle. According to the suit, she often carries her personal concealed weapon when she is not on duty, because she worries that people she encounters in her line of work may retaliate against her. She said she enjoys visiting Seattle parks, but her favorite now has a no-weapons sign.
Another plaintiff, Ray Carter, is gay and past co-chairman of the Seattle Pride Parade. According to the lawsuit, he said he carries a concealed weapon because he feels, as an openly gay man, he is susceptible to becoming a victim of hate-related crimes.
The plaintiffs are asking that the city be blocked from posting any more no-firearms signs and not implement the new rule.
In response to the suit, the city's law department said, "the City's policy was put in place to protect our most vulnerable and defenseless citizens, our children. The City's most important public duty is to protect its citizens from harm, especially when they are visiting City facilities."
The city attorney's office said it is using the law firm of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe to defend the lawsuit. The firm has agreed to defend the policy on a pro bono basis