• 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.

Knuckels Gains Support

Bookman

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
1,424
Location
Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
imported post

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/387227_citygunsed.html


Seattle's Gun Law: OK, make it legal SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD
The mayor of Seattle and the attorney general disagree about the legality of the city's gun ban on public property.
Attorney General Rob McKenna says state law "does pre-empt a city's authority to adopt firearms laws or regulations of application to the general public, unless specifically authorized by state law."
However, Regina LaBelle, legal counsel to Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, told the P-I: "We always have to keep in mind not just state law but also federal laws. But our bottom line is that we want to have common-sense gun laws."
We absolutely agree -- and think the Legislature should take this "case" up quickly and specifically authorize Seattle's ordinance. We think it gives urban areas a needed tool to reduce gun violence.
The bottom line for us is that it makes sense for tougher standards to apply for individuals carrying handguns on public property. The notion of a single, statewide pre-emption standard does not make sense any longer (if it ever did). We don't want people carrying weapons into libraries, concerts or other public events. A city -- any city -- ought to be able to enact a ban at such events without state pre-emption -- especially if it's clear that this represents the majority will.
Seattle is on the right course here; it's the road leading to a more common-sense approach to gun laws. We'd like to see this issue solved without expensive litigation. We're counting on the Legislature to make it so.
----------------------------------------------------------


Fortunately, the 40+ comments so far, with few exceptions are totally against this. A couple of normally anti-gun folks even spoke against it.
 

911Boss

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
753
Location
Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
imported post

quote:
"A city -- any city -- ought to be able to enact a ban at such events without state pre-emption -- especially if it's clear that this represents the majority will."

Personally, I don't have a problem putting to a vote and letting the majority decide. Of course, if we are talking about changing state-wide pre-emption, that would mean putting to a state-wide vote. The San-Fran wannabes will be shocked when they still lose. They have put gun-control measures to a vote before and had them resoundingly defeated. What is clear is that the Mayor's lame idea does NOT represent the majority view.

quote:
"We'd like to see this issue solved without expensive litigation. We're counting on the Legislature to make it so."

Then just drop it. The AG's opinion made it pretty clear you don't have a standing if the clearly written law isn't clear enough. If you fight you are going to end up with BOTH things you don't want, pre-emption upheld, and a big fat litigation bill. With any luck you will also make a few gun-owners moderately wealthy after pay-outs to settle the test cases they bring.
 

bluer1

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
160
Location
, ,
imported post

It's a classic case of, "I don't need a gun, why should you?" Just give it a couple more years, soon MLK Way's violence and gang culture will spill over into Seattle proper. Especially since they expanded the bus lines in that area, which we have a direct result such as the "Tuba Man" incident. It will come to a head now that they are cutting police and "youth anti-violence" programs, which again were set up to combat violence in this PROBLEM AREA.

I'm glad I live in Snohomish County, we don't need "programs" to teach kids not to kill each other and innocent musicians, it comes from good parenting and social morality.
 

bluer1

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
160
Location
, ,
imported post

911Boss wrote:
bluer1 wrote:
It's a classic case of, "I don't need a gun, why should you?"

My favorite response to that is "It is the Bill of "Rights", not the Bill of "Needs"..."
Soon to read, "The bill of Nickels"
 

amlevin

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

If the Legislature falls for this crap then the State will be right back in the same pot of soup that "preemption" was enacted to cure. Every little "P!$$ Stop Town in the State could pass their own ordinances on where one could carry and where not. Just like before preemption. It might be time to write our "reps" and point this out before Mayor Larda$$ gets too much traction on this.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

amlevin wrote:
If the Legislature falls for this crap then the State will be right back in the same pot of soup that "preemption" was enacted to cure. Every little "P!$$ Stop Town in the State could pass their own ordinances on where one could carry and where not. Just like before preemption. It might be time to write our "reps" and point this out before Mayor Larda$$ gets too much traction on this.
A little pre-emption to save pre-emption couldn't hurt.
 

Charles Paul Lincoln

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

What part of "shall not be impaired" doesn't this writer understand? Sounds as if he/she is "impaired."

I thinkthe mayor needs a new attorney, if she thinks there is some federal law that is going to supercede the Washingotn state constitution. Perhaps she is still working her way through the Heller decision. Lots of big words there.

Charles
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Charles Paul Lincoln wrote:
What part of "shall not be impaired" doesn't this writer understand? Sounds as if he/she is "impaired."

I thinkthe mayor needs a new attorney, if she thinks there is some federal law that is going to supercede the Washingotn state constitution. Perhaps she is still working her way through the Heller decision. Lots of big words there.

Charles

They don't care about the law, I'm guessing.

I'm guessing they're playing a public image/opinion game where they're trying to sound like they have a reasonable argument while 1) not having to give in on somethingthat would go against their arrogant, elitist attitudes,and 2) buy time tostart influencing the state legislature.
 

grishnav

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

Small protest in front of the PI this weekend? Hand out fliers and let people know that the PI doesn't respect your inalienable rights? Bring some pictures of people who have successfully defended themselves with a firearm, with the words "Mayor Nickels and the PI are conspiring to kill this man -- please help us stop them."
 

fetch

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
271
Location
Spokane, Wa., ,
imported post

Gee, can't you guys on the west side get a leash on Nickels? Make an appointment (or not) and go into his office and tell him to his face he is willfully violating the state constitution. Get the whole thing on video tape and send it to the AG.
I will be seeing Spokane mayor Verner this week to see exactly where she stands. Maybe I can get her to publicly denounce Nickels. Hey, you never know until you try.
 
Top