• 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.

Port of Seattle Meeting

What location is bestest?

  • Pier 69, Alaskan Way between Clay and Vine Streets

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in the Airport Office Building, International Auditorium, Mezza

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
D

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

Well it was me, Gene Beasley, and a local firearms attorney.

One of the agenda items for the executive session (prior to the main meeting) was OPEN CARRY under the general topic of "Legal Risk". It is pure coincidence that the meeting where we planned to make public comments was the same meeting where the Board planned to discuss open carry in executive session.

After the call to order of the main meeting, the president of the Board moved the public comment period from the end of the meeting to the beginning. The three of us who were there spoke, I in the middle.

That's about all there is to tell. I wish we could have had a better showing. If I'm not mistaken, we have a member of this board who is still subject to legal process for an OC incident at the airport. The issue is a topic of current discussion by and with the Port. The issue is in the news in general because of the Nickels scheme. All that and we could only muster three people? Disappointing. I sincerely hope that when the Seattle issue comes to a head, we can do better.
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

deanf wrote:
All that and we could only muster three people?
Click to expand...
Sometimes threewell spoken people is a louder voice than a whole crowd that are merely repeating the same topic.

I have no doubt that you represented the group well an the point was made. Now let's see if the Port listens not only to your input but that of the Attorney General as well. If they choose to ignore, the next step should be a "Press Release" to all the major news media in the Puget Sound Area. If that occurs be sure to point out that the Port is not following the law as indicated by the AG. That should make their heads turn. Politicians can't stand the truth when it is printed in the newspaper.
 
G

grishnav

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
736
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

deanf wrote:
Well it was me, Gene Beasley, and a local firearms attorney.

One of the agenda items for the executive session (prior to the main meeting) was OPEN CARRY under the general topic of "Legal Risk". It is pure coincidence that the meeting where we planned to make public comments was the same meeting where the Board planned to discuss open carry in executive session.

After the call to order of the main meeting, the president of the Board moved the public comment period from the end of the meeting to the beginning. The three of us who were there spoke, I in the middle.

That's about all there is to tell. I wish we could have had a better showing. If I'm not mistaken, we have a member of this board who is still subject to legal process for an OC incident at the airport. The issue is a topic of current discussion by and with the Port. The issue is in the news in general because of the Nickels scheme. All that and we could only muster three people? Disappointing. I sincerely hope that when the Seattle issue comes to a head, we can do better.
Click to expand...

It's tough when this crap happens during working hours; just one of the many ways government works to keep it's citizens out of the process. If they truly wanted public input, they'd hold the damn meeting on Saturday at noon.

But they don't.

They aren't legitimate. The quicker people realize that, the better, but it's slow in coming.........
 
Bill Starks

Bill Starks

State Researcher
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
4,304
Location
Nortonville, KY, USA
imported post

My intent was to be there but last minute issues took presidence. If this was scheduled on any day but Tues / Thurs I would have been at your side. It was a true shame as I was only across the street...
 
D

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

By request, here is the text of my remarks to the Port Commission:

My name is Dean Fxxxxx. I live in Auburn. I’ve come before you to inform you that the Port’s rule against the legal possession of guns in the non-sterile public areas of SeaTac Airport is illegal and cannot and must not be enforced.
It is a violation of the State’s firearms preemption statute. It is also a violation of federal law, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.
Your general counsel’s office will tell you, because of technicalities, that state preemption does not apply to the Port’s rules.
These technicalities are based on very slippery pretexts – pretexts which will likely fail if subject to the proper venue.
The state Attorney General has recently issued an opinion that rules such as The Port’s are illegal and cannot be enforced. The attorney general also specifically addressed using trespass law to prosecute people with guns, and also found that method of enforcement to be against state law.
I have no particular burning desire to carry a gun in the non-sterile areas of the airport.
I DO have a burning desire to see that public officials obey the law. I’m very concerned that enforcement of this rule may subject The Port and its employees to expensive false arrest lawsuits. This is a violation of your fiduciary responsibilities. I ask you to repeal this rule as soon as is possible, and to direct the Port Police to suspend enforcement of the rule until it is repealed. I will be sending each of you a letter expanding on the depth and detail of my remarks.
Click to expand...
 
K

kparker

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
1,326
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
imported post

Excellent, Dean! If I wanted to show someone an example to illustrate what Amlevin meant by "well-spoken", I'd just point to your example: Brief, clear, to the point. Thanks!
 
C

Charles Paul Lincoln

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
222
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

Dean:

Thank you for your rational and well-spoken comments. You represented firearm owners in a very positive light. Your testimony left nothing else to be said.

Had you been first to speak on the matter, the attorney's comments might have made some sense to the port commissioners.:banghead:

Charles
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top