SMACKDOWN: Seattle appeal denied by WA Supremes; parks gun ban goes down!!!!

Dave Workman · Mar 8, 2012

SMACKDOWN: Gun rights prevail as WA Supremes deny Seattle’s appeal

The Washington State Supreme Court has unanimously rejected the City of Seattle’s request for review in its loss to the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association in a case that struck down the city’s attempt to ban guns in city park facilities…

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...-prevail-as-wa-supremes-deny-seattle-s-appeal

oneeyeross · Mar 8, 2012

Well written, thank you, Dave.

Now if we can just get the rest of the state to fully understand what this TRULY means, we'll be getting some where.

Freedom First · Mar 8, 2012

Now that's a darned shame. And me feeling much safer with a sign telling the bad guys to leave their guns at home. Now I have to keep carrying this heavy .45 everywhere I go...

It's a rare good deal from the machine. Nice to see once in a while.

WOD · Mar 8, 2012

Nice!

gogodawgs · Mar 8, 2012

Now it is assumed that Seattle (and other cities) will come after preemption at the legislative level.

Dave Workman · Mar 8, 2012

gogodawgs said:
Now it is assumed that Seattle (and other cities) will come after preemption at the legislative level.

You got it, mon!

Seattle bitterly vows to lobby for erosion of state preemption

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...vows-to-lobby-for-erosion-of-state-preemption

amlevin · Mar 8, 2012

So does this refusal to review mean that Seattle gets to write a check for SAF/NRA legal fees? If so they should get their name on a plaque somewhere honoring them as among the other morons that lost on the issue of gun control, in court.

GoGo is right, expect a full court press in the next legislative session, assuming they can get their @$$es out of the budget crack they've found themselves in. If they're still flubbering around, gun legislation will be the farthest thing from their minds (assuming there is more than one or two complete ones among them).

223to45 · Mar 8, 2012

Dave Workman said:
You got it, mon!

Seattle bitterly vows to lobby for erosion of state preemption

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...vows-to-lobby-for-erosion-of-state-preemption

I just don't get it. The guy that started this whole thing was illegal in the first place, so what would another law do.

If Seattle goes for this you can bet Bellingham will stand with them.

deanf · Mar 8, 2012

I see the whole thing, starting with the original park's ban, as a ruse. They knew they would loose, and they plan to somehow use the loss as evidence that preemption should be modified.

Dave_pro2a · Mar 8, 2012

deanf said:
I see the whole thing, starting with the original park's ban, as a ruse. They knew they would loose, and they plan to somehow use the loss as evidence that preemption should be modified.

Of course.

decklin · Mar 8, 2012

It's frustrating to see them repeatedly wasting tax payers money when there are legitimate issues to be tackled.

Hardbuck90 · Mar 8, 2012

decklin said:
It's frustrating to see them repeatedly wasting tax payers money when there are legitimate issues to be tackled.

The city officials who pushed challenging state law in court and used tax payer money should be fired

Bookman · Mar 9, 2012

decklin said:
It's frustrating to see them repeatedly wasting tax payers money when there are legitimate issues to be tackled.

The only monies actually being spent by the city are the fees they'll have to reimburse SAF and NRA for as well as the the cost of the original signs and the man hours to install and remove them. The cities legal work was a pro bono thing by one of the local law firms.

fire suppressor · Mar 9, 2012

Great news thanks for the update!

sudden valley gunner · Mar 9, 2012

223to45 said:
I just don't get it. The guy that started this whole thing was illegal in the first place, so what would another law do.

If Seattle goes for this you can bet Bellingham will stand with them.

Bellingham has already said they would lobby Olympia.

amlevin · Mar 9, 2012

Since preemption has been in place since 1983, does anyone know if any parts have been challenged over the last 29 years?

I don't see much success in any effort to change it. The argument against letting every city and county pass their own versions of gun restrictions would go against the original argument for the law. Much of the rhetoric by City leaders is probably more for the purpose of vote getting.

Don't think the Legislators haven't considered the growing number of CPL's issued and the increased number of firearms owned by individuals. They see these numbers as voters and just like any other dedicated group, more likely to vote than the average apathetic registered voter.

DCKilla · Mar 9, 2012

Yes, they had 29 years to disagree and change the law.

John Hardin · Mar 9, 2012

Bookman said:
The cities legal work was a pro bono thing by one of the local law firms.

...which they probably intended as "advertising" and are now regretting. "You spent how much of the partnership's money on a case you knew was doomed?"

What was the firm's name, so that we can point at them and laugh?

Dave Workman · Mar 9, 2012

sudden valley gunner said:
Bellingham has already said they would lobby Olympia.

Is that in print somewhere? I need a reference link.

MT4Runner · Mar 9, 2012

Checking in from Montana--congrats Seattle residents--this is great news!

Good luck keeping the pre-emption on the books in Olympia next session.

SMACKDOWN: Seattle appeal denied by WA Supremes; parks gun ban goes down!!!!

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member