colt45ws
Regular Member
imported post
To not further de-rail the Resturant DNP thread.
Gene Beasley wrote:
To not further de-rail the Resturant DNP thread.
Gene Beasley wrote:
-
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.
-
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.
Washington Cities in violation of preemption.
- Thread starter colt45ws
- Start date
colt45ws
Regular Member
imported post
:banghead: Thing does NOT work right when you try to do that..POS
Anyway, I got the full list and I see mentioned Moses Lake Code 12.36.090
12.36.090 Dangerous Equipment and Activities: No person shall use or engage in any activity that creates
an unreasonable interference or danger to other persons. Such activities include the use of
archery equipment, discuses, javelins, shot-puts, aircraft, rockets, missiles, firearms, and all
activities that the City Manager declares unreasonable. The City Manager may allow those
activities in special-use areas as provided in Section 12.36.100 of this chapter. (Ord. 2228,
8/9/05)
Im wondering about this one. It specifies "use." Does that include carrying, Im not so sure. The "City Manager" clause gets me though. Im thinking that if the City Manager were to declare OC unreasonable, it would be, against this law, and therefore preemption, right?
Im trying to figure this one out, and if it needs to be attacked. Any help?
:banghead: Thing does NOT work right when you try to do that..POS
Anyway, I got the full list and I see mentioned Moses Lake Code 12.36.090
12.36.090 Dangerous Equipment and Activities: No person shall use or engage in any activity that creates
an unreasonable interference or danger to other persons. Such activities include the use of
archery equipment, discuses, javelins, shot-puts, aircraft, rockets, missiles, firearms, and all
activities that the City Manager declares unreasonable. The City Manager may allow those
activities in special-use areas as provided in Section 12.36.100 of this chapter. (Ord. 2228,
8/9/05)
Im wondering about this one. It specifies "use." Does that include carrying, Im not so sure. The "City Manager" clause gets me though. Im thinking that if the City Manager were to declare OC unreasonable, it would be, against this law, and therefore preemption, right?
Im trying to figure this one out, and if it needs to be attacked. Any help?
TechnoWeenie
Regular Member
imported post
colt45ws wrote:
colt45ws wrote:
Welcome
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
imported post
Part 1) If there is something that I can clear up with how the spreadsheet works, PM me. It uses Autofilters and is sorted by county. It looks at four specific areas that seemed to crop up over and over again; possession/carry in parks, Council Chambers/City Hall, broader than allowed language for establishments that serve alcohol, ability for local executive to curtail rights in emergency. There is also an 'other' column for notes and if there is a code number, then there was something else that violated preemption. *** this is up to date as of roughly May 2008.
Part 2) As far as Moses Lake,I think it is poorly worded and might be worth an inquiry. I wouldn't pose it as an OC question but as a legal carry question. I see no sense in putting them on the defense when they might jump right up and make a reasonable change. But that's my $.02 worth.
Part 1) If there is something that I can clear up with how the spreadsheet works, PM me. It uses Autofilters and is sorted by county. It looks at four specific areas that seemed to crop up over and over again; possession/carry in parks, Council Chambers/City Hall, broader than allowed language for establishments that serve alcohol, ability for local executive to curtail rights in emergency. There is also an 'other' column for notes and if there is a code number, then there was something else that violated preemption. *** this is up to date as of roughly May 2008.
Part 2) As far as Moses Lake,I think it is poorly worded and might be worth an inquiry. I wouldn't pose it as an OC question but as a legal carry question. I see no sense in putting them on the defense when they might jump right up and make a reasonable change. But that's my $.02 worth.
Richard6218
Regular Member
imported post
The following is on the books of the Ferndale Munitipal Code:
12.26.040 Firearms, campfires, fireworks and camping.
A.The possession of firearms in City parks is prohibited, except those firearms in possession of law enforcement personnel.
In the wake of the successful campaign to have a no-firearms sign removed at the library, I wrote to the City Administrator about this ordinance. He told me verbally that it "would be taken care of", and that in any case the code is not being enforced by the city police. My letter was dated November 22; so far I have seen no sign of an item on the City Council's agenda. I am advancing my calendar to January for follow-up.
The following is on the books of the Ferndale Munitipal Code:
12.26.040 Firearms, campfires, fireworks and camping.
A.The possession of firearms in City parks is prohibited, except those firearms in possession of law enforcement personnel.
In the wake of the successful campaign to have a no-firearms sign removed at the library, I wrote to the City Administrator about this ordinance. He told me verbally that it "would be taken care of", and that in any case the code is not being enforced by the city police. My letter was dated November 22; so far I have seen no sign of an item on the City Council's agenda. I am advancing my calendar to January for follow-up.