• 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.

NICKELS TO PUSH BAN, HEARING SET

3/325

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
332
Location
Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
imported post

This recent shooting at SouthCenter Mall will be used as yet another reason to support the ban. It's imperative people be reminded that this happened in a "gun free zone."
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

FMCDH wrote:
Richard6218 wrote
+1

Well said. Plagiarism is the greatest form of flattery ;) But seriously, you said some things I had overlooked. The main point is that they get the message that there is outrage out here about what they're doing.


I once read a polling statistic that said for every one person who sends a letter or gives a statement, there are 10000 who's opinion is reflected by that statement but are silent.
Your point is on the mark but I think the ratio is more like 1:100. Still, it's significant.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

3/325 wrote:
This recent shooting at SouthCenter Mall will be used as yet another reason to support the ban. It's imperative people be reminded that this happened in a "gun free zone."
This is a comment I sent to both KIRO and KOMO news.

While you and other news agencies are reporting about the Southcenter Mall shooting that occurred on Saturday Nov 22nd, you may consider mentioning that Southcenter Mall, as well as most malls in Washington state are considered "Gun Free Zones" by corporate policy. A policy that works only on paper it would appear. What kind of measures are these malls taking to ensure the safety of law abiding citizens? Citizens who do not carry their own firearms for self defense so as to not violate these misguided corporate policies. A serious look at the effectiveness of these so called gun free zones should be taken, because when you only have the REAL criminals carrying firearms, everyone is less safe.

Thank you.
 

amlevin

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

MadHatter66 wrote:
I think what is also dangerous about this is all the other cities and towns that will use this a "case law" to enact bans as well... Albiet not legal, but it will be an uphill battle to get them over turned... This is very scary for the long term, and Knuckle Head will stop at nothing to go against state law...

Even if Seattle does pass a 'ban', it won't be "Case Law" and can't be cited as such in any court proceeding. It will be somewhat of a "plum" that other cities might use to play "follow the leader".

As for those that attend the hearing, it will carry more weight if you are Seattle Residents. Most cities tend to dismiss any input from non-residents as they don't consider them their constituents.
 

Charles Paul Lincoln

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

It is equally as important to write your state representatives and senators to voice your concern about Mayor Nickel's proposed ban. For one, they have pull with the Seattle City Council -- they can oppose any funding asked for by Seattle.

Secondly, this is a long legislative session with a budget shortfall. Issues like gun bans and CPLs are likely to get a lot of attention, since they don't cost money.

Bottom line, write everyone!
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

amlevin wrote:
MadHatter66 wrote:
I think what is also dangerous about this is all the other cities and towns that will use this a "case law" to enact bans as well... Albiet not legal, but it will be an uphill battle to get them over turned... This is very scary for the long term, and Knuckle Head will stop at nothing to go against state law...

Even if Seattle does pass a 'ban', it won't be "Case Law" and can't be cited as such in any court proceeding. It will be somewhat of a "plum" that other cities might use to play "follow the leader".

As for those that attend the hearing, it will carry more weight if you are Seattle Residents. Most cities tend to dismiss any input from non-residents as they don't consider them their constituents.
You are 100% correct onthe firstcount, and 50% on the other. True, it would not be "case law" but it sets a dangerous precedent that other cities may try to emulate. I'm doing battle with my own city up here, and I just hope they don't decide to jump on Seattle's bandwagon before it's over with them.

The thing about being a Seattle resident is true, but if they hear a deafening roar of opposition from all across the state it just might have some effect. Probably not enough to stop them altogether, but it may well give them doubts. Point is, SPEAK UP AND BE HEARD!
 

Bill Starks

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

Ok, I know I am quite savvy when it comes to finding things on the web but how in the hell does one find information on the Bertha Knight Landes Room? I know why the roomed is named, where it is located, who has used it in the last 3 years but not one piece of information as to seating capacity.

I also read the following for this debacle...
Public input
The city will hold a public hearing on the proposed administrative rule at 6:30 p.m. on December 15, 2008. The hearing will be held at Seattle City Hall, 600 Fourth Avenue, with sign-in beginning at 5:30 p.m. The Bertha Knight Landes room is accessible from the building’s Fifth Avenue entrance.

Sign-in for what? Is this a lottery drawing to get in?
 

MadHatter66

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
320
Location
Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
imported post

Richard6218 wrote:
amlevin wrote:
MadHatter66 wrote:
I think what is also dangerous about this is all the other cities and towns that will use this a "case law" to enact bans as well... Albiet not legal, but it will be an uphill battle to get them over turned... This is very scary for the long term, and Knuckle Head will stop at nothing to go against state law...

Even if Seattle does pass a 'ban', it won't be "Case Law" and can't be cited as such in any court proceeding. It will be somewhat of a "plum" that other cities might use to play "follow the leader".

As for those that attend the hearing, it will carry more weight if you are Seattle Residents. Most cities tend to dismiss any input from non-residents as they don't consider them their constituents.
You are 100% correct onthe firstcount, and 50% on the other. True, it would not be "case law" but it sets a dangerous precedent that other cities may try to emulate. I'm doing battle with my own city up here, and I just hope they don't decide to jump on Seattle's bandwagon before it's over with them.

The thing about being a Seattle resident is true, but if they hear a deafening roar of opposition from all across the state it just might have some effect. Probably not enough to stop them altogether, but it may well give them doubts. Point is, SPEAK UP AND BE HEARD!
Sorry, brain fart... was sitting there trying to think of the word "precedent" and it just wasnt coming to me... I do stand corrected though...
 

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

M1Gunr wrote:
Sign-in for what? Is this a lottery drawing to get in?

To make comment, you have to have signed in so they can keep track of who wants to speak.

Don't sign in and they won't allow you to speak up.
 

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

Submitted by me a few minutes ago.

[line]

I believe this is a "knee jerk" reaction to an isolated incident. The shooter at Folk Life should never have been issued a Concealed Weapons Permit. However, the Sheriff's office had no way of knowing that because his past mental issues were not know to them.

All a new rule, policy, or law will do is give criminals another rule, policy or law to violate. By definition, criminals do not care what law applies, they will violate it anyway.

This "rule" will only serve to punish decent, law abiding citizens and create yet another "Gun Free Zone" that will be ignored. Another term for "Gun Free Zone" is "Victim Rich Environment" because criminals intent on doing harm can be reasonably certain there is no one present who can defend themselves or anyone else.

This type of policy is in affect at our area shopping malls. Reading the local news shows us this is a failed policy because the gangs and other criminal elements don't care what the rule or law is. TWO shootings by criminals at Southcenter Mall this year, One shooting at Northgate Mall this year. All of them by criminals and NOT law abiding carriers of firearms.

I urge you to rethink the direction you are taking this process. Remember, 2009 IS an election year and one in twenty six Washington residents have Concealed Weapons Permits. ALL of them are of voting age.

I'm sure you can do the math....
 

Triple Tap

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
295
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

I believe that we could use, as Nickles is an elected official, and he was sworn in to up hold the laws of washington state and the City of Seattle:

RCW 9A.80.010Official misconduct.
(1) A public servant is guilty of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to deprive another person of a lawful right or privilege:

(a) He intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or

(b) He intentionally refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law.

(2) Official misconduct is a gross misdemeanor.

------------------
Also in effect is his Oath of Office.

Code:
[b]ARTICLE XIX. Officers; Terms and Vacancies[/b]
[b]Sec. 4. [b]OATH[/b] OF OFFICE; OFFICIAL BOND[/b]

Every Councilmember and every other officer of the City and the head
of every department, before entering upon the duties of his or her
office, shall take and subscribe an [/url][b]oath[/b] or affirmation that he or
she possesses all the qualifications prescribed for his or her
office, by this Charter; [b]that he or she will support the Constitution[/b]
of the United States, and [b]of the State of Washington[/b], and the Charter
and ordinances of The City of Seattle; and that he or she [b]will
faithfully conduct himself or herself in office.[/b] Every officer,
when so required by law or ordinance, shall, before entering upon the
duties of his or her office, and within ten days after his or her
election or appointment, give bond to the City in such sum as shall
be designated by ordinance or otherwise, conditioned for the faithful
performance of his or her duties, and that he or she will pay over
all moneys belonging to the City, as provided by law. If any person
elected or appointed to any office shall fail to take or subscribe
such [b]oath[/b] or affirmation, or to give bond, as herein required, his or
her office shall be deemed vacant.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

Triple Tap wrote:
I believe that we could use, as Nickles is an elected official, and he was sworn in to up hold the laws of washington state and the City of Seattle:

RCW 9A.80.010Official misconduct.
(1) A public servant is guilty of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to deprive another person of a lawful right or privilege:

(a) He intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or


Thats just the point here. Nickles is attempting to exploit what he (and his ceasefire lawyers) see as a loophole in the law. He completely and totally expects and knows its going to be challenged in court, and will simply claim that he is simply keeping with the "spirit" of the law, and acting in good faith with the "safety of the community" in mind. (just threw up a little bit there)

The only way a charge as stated above would stick is if he lost badly inthe resortingcourt challanges. He doesn't see that happening, and for the most part, even if he looses he feels he will have "made his statement" to the public, and covered his own butt.

The best way to tear him apart is to have the media do it. They have to be the ones to point out the obvious to the voters, and WE have to point out the obvious to the media.
 

kparker

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

The hearing will be held at Seattle City Hall

Can a Seattle resident please confirm for us: is the City Hall integrated with court facilities such that it's a no-carry place (like Tacoma's County-City Building is), and if so, how efficient/well-informed are the security folks about checking in our handguns?
 

XD45PlusP

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
250
Location
, ,
imported post

kparker wrote:
The hearing will be held at Seattle City Hall

Can a Seattle resident please confirm for us: is the City Hall integrated with court facilities such that it's a no-carry place (like Tacoma's County-City Building is), and if so, how efficient/well-informed are the security folks about checking in our handguns?

City Hall is not a secure facility like a jail/police station, neitherare there any court proceedings there. You are good to go.... IMHO

I WILL BE THERE.

XD
 

Charles Paul Lincoln

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

Even if City Hall is a secure facility because of courtrooms, statute says they can only restrict the areas immediately adjacent to the courtroom -- not the whole building.

If they restrict carry, they have to by law provide lockboxes or another means to secure our weapons.
 
Top