Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Joe Link, Oct 15, 2009.
Not trying to paint this with too broad of a brush... but isn't this the city of Seattle basically designating public places as "Constitution-free zones"?
Anyone want to go break laws?
I thought Washington has state preemption similar to Oregon. How did the city of Seattle get around that?
they have been waiting for the mayor to do this. It will loose in court and the mayor knows it. He's just doing it to make himself look good.
This is typical of why most anti-gun laws get passed. The mayor knows full well that this will do absolutely nothing to reduce crime, but it will LOOK like he is doing something. The sad part is a lot of people won't see thru it.
This won't survive. The SAF and CCRKBA (both headquartered up here) are already geared up for a lawsuit. Mayor McCheese is on his way out and this is a strategic move to improve his political standing with the current administration. It doesn't have to be successful, it just has to be thrown out there. The sad part is that Seattle will now foot the bill for a no-win lawsuit. Our state Attorney General gave the official no-go on this about a year ago when the mayor first suggested it.
Yes, Washington has preemption in its constitution; gun laws can only be made at the state level. All other laws, ordinances, etc. from smaller authorities are automatically null and void.
If I lived closer to Seattle, I'd be investing some time in playing the "RKBA Lottery" as I like to call it. Please, PLEASE arrest me! I need the money!
I make a point of avoiding Seattle, but I am expecting to make a point of going to Seattle for the sole purpose of breaking this "rule" (it isn't a law).
Mayor Dickels not "get around" state preemption, he blatantly ignored it. I no longer even think he is doing it with a positive (albeit misguided) intent. On the first go around the people were against it something like 9-1, when they had a second round of public opinion, it did get anymore support.
I think at this point he is just giving a big "F U" to the folks who kicked his *** out of being re-elected in the primary round. All he is doing is is saddling the city with liability.
I would love to see some cracker-jack lawyer make a case and sue him individually for malfeasance or some such thing where he is personally liable instead of the city being on the hook.
I would be happy to OC in a Seattle Park if a group wants to get together and do it and legal representation is pre-arranged. Mayor Greg "Small Change" Nickels has annoyed me way too much over the last few years.
Visit opencarry.org to find events for exactly that.
Hopefully you'll see me at one of them. But getting across the Sound isn't cheap for me these days.
This is the dumbest thing Mayor Numbnuts has done yet. :angry: I have a house in Seattle and I pay taxes. I'll bet it costs a couple hundred grand to put signs up in all of the 500 locations they say this "new rule" applies to. Then it's going to cost a bunch more to lose in court. McKenna said again today that it will NOT survive a court challenge. Then it'll cost us another hundred grand to take all the stupid signs back down. This is likely millions of dollars pissed down a hole so Mayor Numbnuts could see his name in an AP article. He needs to somehow be held personally liable and then be tarred, feathered, and shipped back to Chicago to be with his anti-gun douchebag friends.
Hmmm, "bubblegumbag", that's almost as funny as what I typed....
Visit this thread at opencarry.com:
Planning meeting to fight gun ban
People are trying to get a coordinated plan to protest this without damage to the image of gun owners.
Someone should prompt one of the gun owners rights groups to file a court injunction halting the posting of the illegal signs. Why allow Seattle to waste the money for a "law" everyone KNOWS is illegal?
It amazes me the city emplyed drones will even place the signs. Yes, Mayor ChumpChange SHOULD be held personally liable. Perhaps even impeached before his term is up. He has deliberately, knowingly, and contrary to the Attorney General, issued an executive order that is illegal. Malfeasance in office? Violating state law and/or the US Consititution is against his oath of office and grounds for impeachment. A court should step up to the plate and issue a restraining order. Perhaps THIS would be the best tactic for the rights groups.
Anyone ever notice that King County parks all display signs stating firearms are not allowed in those parks? I've seen them.. and ignored them. One more restriction counter to state law. Could/should be challenged as well.
Separate names with a comma.