imported post
So I sent Bothell an email pertaining to their ban on loaded firearms in city parks and this is what i received back. Way out of line in my opinon.
Dear Mr. xxxx,
Thank you for your attached email. I must respectfully disagree with your interpretation of state law and its application to Bothell Municipal Code (BMC) 8.60.350. RCW 9.41.300 provides an exemption from state preemption which allows a city to establish no shooting zones. Also, case law differentiates between general firearms regulations (which are fairly clearly preempted unless an exemption from preemption exists) and the right of a city to regulate its own property. See, Cherry v. Mun. of Metro Seattle, 116 Wn.2d 794 (1991) and Pacific Northwest Shooting Park Ass'n v. City of Sequim, 158 Wn. 2d 342 (2006). This line of cases makes logical sense. Why should a city be prohibited from banning weapons from its city owned parks while any other property owner has the full right to do the same thing on their property? Another section in BMC Chapter 8 prohibits building fires in the park. These are safety measures enacted by the City to encourage safety in City parks - not criminal statutes which compete with the States legislation in the area of firearms.
Apparently, many cities share Bothell's position on this issue. A recent article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer indicates that Seattle is moving toward issuing a ban of firearms in City owned parks and buildings. According to the article there are at least 39 cities in Washington that have the same type of restrictions already in place. Clearly, Bothell is not in the minority in its position on this issue. I greatly respect State Law and the Constitutional protections afforded to the citizens of this City, State and County and I do not believe that Bothell's safety regulations relating to Bothell City Parks in any way conflict with Washington State Law or the Constitution of the United States.
This is the email i sent them:
Dear City Attorny, Council, or Manager of Bothell:
I would like to bring to the city’s attention Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 [Firearms, weapons.] and its violation of Washington State Law.
Currently Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is worded: “No persons except duly authorized law enforcement personnel shall possess a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism; nor shall any person discharge across, in or onto any Bothell park area a firearm, bow and arrow, air or gas weapon, or any device capable of injuring or killing any person or animal, or damaging or destroying any public or private property, except where the department for good cause has authorized special recreational activity upon finding that it is not inconsistent with Bothell park use. (Ord. 1835 §1, 2000; Ord. 1277 §1, 1987).”
Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is in violation of RCW 9.41.290 [State Preemption]: “Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.”
Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is inconsistent and more restrictive then RCW 9.41.300 when it states: “No persons except duly authorized law enforcement personnel shall possess a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism”. There is no exemption in RCW 9.41.300 that stats a city can restrict the right to carry a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism onto the grounds of a public park. Under RCW 9.41.290, Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is preempted and repealed. I would also like to direct your attention to the Washington State Attorney General's Opinon AGO 2008 No. 8 which states "RCW 9.41.290 preempts a city’s authority to enact local laws that prohibit possession of firearms on city property or in city-owned facilities."
I request that you advise the city council and Manager to remove or revise the referenced codein order to prevent and preclude the potential for a lawsuit from illegal citation and/or arrest in violation of state law. Further, I request that you assist the city law enforcement officials to develop a bulletin for officers that will clear up misconceptions caused by the preempted code. I look forward to hearing back from you about this issue.
Apparently, many cities share Bothell's position on this issue. A recent article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer indicates that Seattle is moving toward issuing a ban of firearms in City owned parks and buildings. According to the article there are at least 39 cities in Washington that have the same type of restrictions already in place. Clearly, Bothell is not in the minority in its position on this issue. I greatly respect State Law and the Constitutional protections afforded to the citizens of this City, State and County and I do not believe that Bothell's safety regulations relating to Bothell City Parks in any way conflict with Washington State Law or the Constitution of the United States.
So I sent Bothell an email pertaining to their ban on loaded firearms in city parks and this is what i received back. Way out of line in my opinon.
Dear Mr. xxxx,
Thank you for your attached email. I must respectfully disagree with your interpretation of state law and its application to Bothell Municipal Code (BMC) 8.60.350. RCW 9.41.300 provides an exemption from state preemption which allows a city to establish no shooting zones. Also, case law differentiates between general firearms regulations (which are fairly clearly preempted unless an exemption from preemption exists) and the right of a city to regulate its own property. See, Cherry v. Mun. of Metro Seattle, 116 Wn.2d 794 (1991) and Pacific Northwest Shooting Park Ass'n v. City of Sequim, 158 Wn. 2d 342 (2006). This line of cases makes logical sense. Why should a city be prohibited from banning weapons from its city owned parks while any other property owner has the full right to do the same thing on their property? Another section in BMC Chapter 8 prohibits building fires in the park. These are safety measures enacted by the City to encourage safety in City parks - not criminal statutes which compete with the States legislation in the area of firearms.
Apparently, many cities share Bothell's position on this issue. A recent article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer indicates that Seattle is moving toward issuing a ban of firearms in City owned parks and buildings. According to the article there are at least 39 cities in Washington that have the same type of restrictions already in place. Clearly, Bothell is not in the minority in its position on this issue. I greatly respect State Law and the Constitutional protections afforded to the citizens of this City, State and County and I do not believe that Bothell's safety regulations relating to Bothell City Parks in any way conflict with Washington State Law or the Constitution of the United States.
This is the email i sent them:
Dear City Attorny, Council, or Manager of Bothell:
I would like to bring to the city’s attention Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 [Firearms, weapons.] and its violation of Washington State Law.
Currently Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is worded: “No persons except duly authorized law enforcement personnel shall possess a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism; nor shall any person discharge across, in or onto any Bothell park area a firearm, bow and arrow, air or gas weapon, or any device capable of injuring or killing any person or animal, or damaging or destroying any public or private property, except where the department for good cause has authorized special recreational activity upon finding that it is not inconsistent with Bothell park use. (Ord. 1835 §1, 2000; Ord. 1277 §1, 1987).”
Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is in violation of RCW 9.41.290 [State Preemption]: “Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.”
Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is inconsistent and more restrictive then RCW 9.41.300 when it states: “No persons except duly authorized law enforcement personnel shall possess a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism”. There is no exemption in RCW 9.41.300 that stats a city can restrict the right to carry a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism onto the grounds of a public park. Under RCW 9.41.290, Bothell Municipal Code 8.60.350 is preempted and repealed. I would also like to direct your attention to the Washington State Attorney General's Opinon AGO 2008 No. 8 which states "RCW 9.41.290 preempts a city’s authority to enact local laws that prohibit possession of firearms on city property or in city-owned facilities."
I request that you advise the city council and Manager to remove or revise the referenced codein order to prevent and preclude the potential for a lawsuit from illegal citation and/or arrest in violation of state law. Further, I request that you assist the city law enforcement officials to develop a bulletin for officers that will clear up misconceptions caused by the preempted code. I look forward to hearing back from you about this issue.
Apparently, many cities share Bothell's position on this issue. A recent article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer indicates that Seattle is moving toward issuing a ban of firearms in City owned parks and buildings. According to the article there are at least 39 cities in Washington that have the same type of restrictions already in place. Clearly, Bothell is not in the minority in its position on this issue. I greatly respect State Law and the Constitutional protections afforded to the citizens of this City, State and County and I do not believe that Bothell's safety regulations relating to Bothell City Parks in any way conflict with Washington State Law or the Constitution of the United States.
