• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Carry at centurylink field, questions, problems, experiences.

Freedom1Man

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
I have not carried at Centurylink field.

I am thinking about it but, I would like to know what problems anyone here has run into carrying there.
RCW 9.41.300 is what I am looking at in this regards.
(2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

(a) Restricting the discharge of firearms in any portion of their respective jurisdictions where there is a reasonable likelihood that humans, domestic animals, or property will be jeopardized. Such laws and ordinances shall not abridge the right of the individual guaranteed by Article I, section 24 of the state Constitution to bear arms in defense of self or others; and

(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

(i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060; or
Click to expand...

I believe that the No-guns policy at centurylink can have no effect. Is this correct thinking? Like the Evergreen Fairgrounds previous no-gun policy.
 
Last edited:
T

tannerwaterbury

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
269
Location
Kelso, Washington, USA
Ehh... my question is: why even bother paying for a game ticket when you have to go through the TSA-like security measures imposed recently? I mean... if you want to agree to have your rights violated, go ahead. I'm gonna avoid any and all stadiums like the plague. If the NFL can impose these measures, then so can the MLB and NBA. No thank you! Rant over...we now bring you to your regularly scheduled forum.
 
Freedom1Man

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
tannerwaterbury said:
Ehh... my question is: why even bother paying for a game ticket when you have to go through the TSA-like security measures imposed recently? I mean... if you want to agree to have your rights violated, go ahead. I'm gonna avoid any and all stadiums like the plague. If the NFL can impose these measures, then so can the MLB and NBA. No thank you! Rant over...we now bring you to your regularly scheduled forum.
Click to expand...

Free ticket.

But I would also want to protest the grope and grab check points with the law.
 
slapmonkay

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
The 'Public Stadium Authority', the public entity that owns the property has an exclusive lease agreement with the Washington State private Corporation 'First & Goal'. First & Goal is the party responsible for booking events at the property. The public authority does NOT impose any firearm restrictions on the private entity 'First & Goal' (See master lease here: http://sdrv.ms/YdzQeM). Therefore, RCW 9.41.300(b) is not applicable as the city/public entity does not appear to be the one imposing the restriction. Rather, the First & Goal entity, which is private and has a lease for the property, is the one imposing the restriction. Since the entity 'First & Goal' is a private entity, I am unable to submit for FOIA of their agreements, they are not required to disclose anything.

Given this, I would say its safe to assume that you won't get in with a firearm openly carried even if you show them RCW 9.41.300 and argue its application. YMMV, this is just all my opinion.
 
Freedom1Man

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
slapmonkay said:
The 'Public Stadium Authority', the public entity that owns the property has an exclusive lease agreement with the Washington State private Corporation 'First & Goal'. First & Goal is the party responsible for booking events at the property. The public authority does NOT impose any firearm restrictions on the private entity 'First & Goal' (See master lease here: http://sdrv.ms/YdzQeM). Therefore, RCW 9.41.300(b) is not applicable as the city/public entity does not appear to be the one imposing the restriction. Rather, the First & Goal entity, which is private and has a lease for the property, is the one imposing the restriction. Since the entity 'First & Goal' is a private entity, I am unable to submit for FOIA of their agreements, they are not required to disclose anything.

Given this, I would say its safe to assume that you won't get in with a firearm openly carried even if you show them RCW 9.41.300 and argue its application. YMMV, this is just all my opinion.
Click to expand...

Thanks for weighing in.

I thought that it was tax payer owned though. So thus such rules would be illegal.
So, the stadium gets built on the tax payer's dime, under protest from the public, and then a private party is given exclusive lease on it? This does not sound legal at all.

Now, I am angry and confused.


Edit, thanks for the lease info too. I'll see about getting in touch with some people who LOVE digging into this kinda of stuff.
 
Last edited:
D

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
[/quote]I thought that it was tax payer owned though. So thus such rules would be illegal.
So, the stadium gets built on the tax payer's dime, under protest from the public, and then a private party is given exclusive lease on it? This does not sound legal at all.[/quote]

If people had been more (self)informed back when the building of a public/private stadium was being contemplated, perhaps we could have put a stop to it.
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
I thought that it was tax payer owned though. So thus such rules would be illegal.
So, the stadium gets built on the tax payer's dime, under protest from the public, and then a private party is given exclusive lease on it? This does not sound legal at all.[/quote]

If people had been more (self)informed back when the building of a public/private stadium was being contemplated, perhaps we could have put a stop to it.[/QUOTE]

+1 End Organized sport welfare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top