Richland, WA city park gun ban.

[twoclones]

Been to this park many times and never noticed the sign myself.

<broken link removed>

Richland men may sue city over gun ban in parks
The Associated Press


RICHLAND, Wash. -- Two Richland men say the city is breaking state law by banning weapons in parks.

The two men, David Campbell and Bob Marguilies, told Tuesday's city council meeting they may file a lawsuit to force the city to change signs posted at parks.

The Tri-City Herald reports the weapons ban is included on a sign at Howard Amon Park that also bans consuming alcohol and letting dogs run loose.

Campbell says the gun ban violates a state attorney general opinion that cities lack authority to prohibit firearms in public places.

In Seattle, Kent lawyer Bob Warden, is threatening a similar lawsuit. He announced he was carrying a gun Saturday when he went to a West Seattle community center where he was turned away.

Read More

 

[Jerry]

Not legal under Chapter 9.41 RCW. State has preemption.

 

[JUSTIficatioN]

Mayor nickels of Seattle "passed" that city law in his infinite wisdom. State law pre empts any city or county laws ,as far as firearms go, from being any different. the GOA and a few other groups and citizens are filing a lawsuit I believe. I think you should get some like minded people with you and start makin some noise over there in richland!

 

[twoclones]

I stopped by Howard Amon park in Richland last week to check out their new sign. The wording did set me to wondering about it's intent and consequence. Also, I read a post on opencarry.org saying the city had changed only one of the signs.

 

[JUSTIficatioN]

does anybody have any current info on the lawyer in seattle who filed/is going to file the lawsuit pertaining to this same situation? havn't heard much about it lately.

 

[twoclones]

His name is Bob Warden and the newest result Google rendered is from 14 December. Guess these things take time.

 

[armedandsafe]

RCW 9.41 is as follows: (With highlights by me)

Sections
9.41.020 Committing crime when armed — Resisting arrest by firing upon officer.

[1961 c 124 § 2; 1935 c 172 § 2; RRS § 2516-2.]
Repealed by 1969 ex.s. c 175 § 2.


9.41.025 Committing crime when armed — Penalties — "Inherently dangerous" defined — Resisting arrest.

[1982 1st ex.s. c 47 § 1; 1981 c 258 § 1; 1969 ex.s. c 175 § 1.]
Repealed by 1981 c 137 § 38; and repealed by 1982 c 10 § 17; and repealed by 1983 c 2 § 20; each effective July 1, 1984.


9.41.030 Being armed prima facie evidence of intent.

[1935 c 172 § 3; RRS § 2516-3.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.093 Exemptions.

[1969 ex.s. c 227 § 2.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.095 Denial of application — Appeal.

[1969 ex.s. c 227 § 3.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.130 False information forbidden.

[1935 c 172 § 13; RRS § 2516-13.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.150 Exemptions — Antique firearms.

[1989 c 132 § 1; 1961 c 124 § 11; 1935 c 172 § 15; RRS § 2516-15.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.160 Penalty.

[1984 c 258 § 312; 1983 c 232 § 11; 1983 c 3 § 7; 1961 c 124 § 12; 1935 c 172 § 16; RRS § 2516-16.]
Recodified as RCW 9.41.810 pursuant to 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 459, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.170 Alien's license to carry firearms — Exception.

[1996 c 295 § 11; 1994 c 190 § 1; 1979 c 158 § 3; 1969 ex.s. c 90 § 1; 1953 c 109 § 1. Prior: 1911 c 52 § 1; RRS § 2517-1.]
Repealed by 2009 c 216 § 8.


9.41.180 Setting spring gun.

[1992 c 7 § 8; 1909 c 249 § 266; RRS § 2518.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.200 Machine gun defined.

[1989 c 231 § 2; 1933 c 64 § 2; RRS § 2518-2.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.


9.41.210 Penalty.

[1933 c 64 § 3; RRS § 2518-3.]
Repealed by 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 460, effective July 1, 1994.

Tell me again what Washington State law they are following.

Pops

 

[twoclones]

Tell me again what Washington State law they are following.

Pops

I read all of the above posts and can't find where anyone said a Washington State law was being followed. What good could possible come from posting only the repealed sections of the chapter named on the sign?

To partially answer your question:
RCW 9.41.050 allows concealed carry by CPL holders. I kind of like that part

Additional relevant, current code can be found here:
Chapter 9.41 RCW

 

[armedandsafe]

I just assumed that some RCW was being followed by the City of Richland because their sign says so in the middle of the sign.

I posted the repealed portions of the sign because that is what the State of Washington RCW web site throws up when you google the RCW. That is what the state feels is the most important part for you to know about the code.

Pops

 

[twoclones]

I just assumed that some RCW was being followed by the City of Richland because their sign says so in the middle of the sign.

Well, according to the sign, certain RCW are being followed. There are currently about 27 sections of active code in the 9.41 chapter. Including the State preemption section RCW 9.41.290

The Howard Amon sign implies Richland Municipal Code to include RCW 9.41 (and it's included State preemption section) in RMC 9.22.070(2) but I've been unable to find the new (2) version online. What I did find is that the ban was apparently slipped past the good citizens on 17 February 2009 when an exception for concealed carry was removed from the RMC. The legal problem with this exception was it not including the entire RCW 9.41 rather than only the RCW 9.41.070. Removal of it inferred a total ban of weapons in the park which is illegal in our fine State. Link to RMC amendment below:

<broken link removed>

What about open carry in the park? I have no idea on that one...