• 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.

Illegal Park Gun Ban Proposal!

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
imported post

in line with plans to bring attention to this 5 cent travisty.

i propose that groups of at least 2 members go to a park, with 1 or more OCing, wearing a teeshirt that says "ask me why i carry a gun?" patrolling the legal area outside the park.

while 1 or more others "unarmed, maybe with an empty holster"with friends and/orfamily/children inside the park wearing teeshirts that say "ask me why im not carrying a gun?"

"gun rights" and "gun free zone" pamphlets would be on hand.

the outside guys can explain that they are keeping the inside guys safe, and the inside guys can explain that they are safe because of the outside guys.
 

Drewesque

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
178
Location
Lacey, Washington, USA
imported post

2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
the outside guys can explain that they are keeping the inside guys safe, and the inside guys can explain that they are safe because of the outside guys.
I don't like the idea of saying something quite like that. Personal safety is a personal responsibility. I get where you're going with this, but I don't like the idea of one group guarding another, especially if that other group is not guarding itself.

Another problem is that some people will immediately jump to the conclusion that there are armed LEOs, so they don't need to be armed, and putting one's safety in someone else's hands just reinforces this.
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
imported post

Drewesque wrote:
2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
the outside guys can explain that they are keeping the inside guys safe, and the inside guys can explain that they are safe because of the outside guys.
I don't like the idea of saying something quite like that. Personal safety is a personal responsibility. I get where you're going with this, but I don't like the idea of one group guarding another, especially if that other group is not guarding itself.

Another problem is that some people will immediately jump to the conclusion that there are armed LEOs, so they don't need to be armed, and putting one's safety in someone else's hands just reinforces this.

i dont know why you even replied to this thread, its obvious you dont understand that the mayor has instituted a seattle wide illegal gun ban in the public parks. we just had a big meet at dinos restraunt to discuss ideas to fight this illegal rule. the meet was even on TV!

reading my thread would show that the outside guys are not LEO, they are just law abiding, armed citizens. the inside guys are not shirking their responsability of self defense, they have been illegaly dissarmed, and put in personall danger by an unjust and illegal power grab by a lame duck mayor.

its a protest, a demonstration, an educational oppertunity.



BTW; out of the 40 folks at the meet, brainstorming ways to bring this to the attention of the public, why have not even ONE of you bothered to offer a reply to my idea?
 

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
imported post

2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
Drewesque wrote:
2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
the outside guys can explain that they are keeping the inside guys safe, and the inside guys can explain that they are safe because of the outside guys.
I don't like the idea of saying something quite like that. Personal safety is a personal responsibility. I get where you're going with this, but I don't like the idea of one group guarding another, especially if that other group is not guarding itself.

Another problem is that some people will immediately jump to the conclusion that there are armed LEOs, so they don't need to be armed, and putting one's safety in someone else's hands just reinforces this.

i dont know why you even replied to this thread,   its obvious you dont understand that the mayor has instituted a seattle wide illegal gun ban in the public parks.   we just had a big meet at dinos restraunt to discuss ideas to fight this illegal rule.   the meet was even on TV!

reading my thread would show that the outside guys are not LEO, they are just law abiding, armed citizens.   the inside guys are not shirking their responsability of self defense,  they have been illegaly dissarmed, and put in personall danger by an unjust and illegal power grab by a lame duck mayor.

its a protest,  a demonstration,  an educational oppertunity.

 

BTW;  out of the 40 folks at the meet, brainstorming ways to bring this to the attention of the public,  why have not even ONE of you bothered to offer a reply to my idea?

You gonna show up to the highway cleanup on 11/08?
 

Drewesque

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
178
Location
Lacey, Washington, USA
imported post

2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
Drewesque wrote:
2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
the outside guys can explain that they are keeping the inside guys safe, and the inside guys can explain that they are safe because of the outside guys.
I don't like the idea of saying something quite like that. Personal safety is a personal responsibility. I get where you're going with this, but I don't like the idea of one group guarding another, especially if that other group is not guarding itself.

Another problem is that some people will immediately jump to the conclusion that there are armed LEOs, so they don't need to be armed, and putting one's safety in someone else's hands just reinforces this.

i dont know why you even replied to this thread, its obvious you dont understand that the mayor has instituted a seattle wide illegal gun ban in the public parks. we just had a big meet at dinos restraunt to discuss ideas to fight this illegal rule. the meet was even on TV!

reading my thread would show that the outside guys are not LEO, they are just law abiding, armed citizens. the inside guys are not shirking their responsability of self defense, they have been illegaly dissarmed, and put in personall danger by an unjust and illegal power grab by a lame duck mayor.

its a protest, a demonstration, an educational oppertunity.



BTW; out of the 40 folks at the meet, brainstorming ways to bring this to the attention of the public, why have not even ONE of you bothered to offer a reply to my idea?
No, I understand the goal of the event, and I see where you're going with it, but I just think any event in which you have someone say that they are relying on someone else for protection doesn't help. The empty-holster folks could point out the illegal gun ban, but I just don't suggest saying that they are safe because of the armed folks.
At no point did I say the outside guys would be LEOs; I just pointed out that putting one's security in someone else's hands is a lot like the people who think the police will protect them.
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
imported post

thanx Drewesque
im still thinkin my ideas are allways the best ever!

but i am askin for input and i understand your view point.

im surprized you dont agree with me. there was a 50/50 chance! oh well.

but im totally shocked and appalled that nobody else has had anything to say about it.



see ya on the boards bob
 

usaf0906

New member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
301
Location
, ,
imported post

If indeed this ban is illegal (which it is) just open carry in the parks and then wait to file lawsuit.
 

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,318
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
imported post

cbackous wrote:
If indeed this ban is illegal (which it is) just open carry in the parks and then wait to file lawsuit.
Read through the discussions leading up to this point. The concern is that a poorly thought out and executed lawsuit can hurt your cause more than it helps. Make a mistake, lose the lawsuit, and you have just created a legal precedent which then has to be overturned.

Look back and find the post by Gray Peterson about Rosa Parks and how that situation came about.
 

Commodore76

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
255
Location
Curtis, Washington, USA
imported post

While I certainly can't speak for the other folks that were present at Dino's, I can say that, for me, I didn't reply until now because I just now read it. After considering your thought, I think that it is a good start to a potential plan.

With that said, the members that were in attendance at Dino's came up with a few different options and the one that we voted on seems to stick out as the best in my humble opinion.

Now, the option that we decided on should not be the only one that we consider and I hope that people, such as you, keep throwing out ideas as you have. The more options, the better as far as I'm concerned.

All the plans in the world are useless without action. The next step is to plan out the details of the choice we all agreed upon and put our plan into action.

For the non 2A friendly folkswho are reading this andhave no idea what our little plan is...

...scared yet?

Gosh, we might totally make a whole bunch of LEGAL, non-aggressive, non-violent and extremely valid Constitutional points! Don't worry, we wont trample your right to free speech. Quite the contrary. Bet your butts, we'll be defending it!

Promise to respect and not to trample our rights too? Yep, it's a challenge!

To the members who are here for all the right reasons, we gotta honor and respect all ideas that our valued members think up. We're on the same team after all!

Respectfully,

Commodore
 

Boo Boo

Banned
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
591
Location
, ,
imported post

the back should say

Defenseless Citizen

Thank you Mayor 5 Pennies

------------------

the front should be

go ahead and

rob/beat/rape/kill me!!

my mayor wants you too.
 

Boo Boo

Banned
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
591
Location
, ,
imported post

can always do.

front

Iwont be a Sheeple, I believein the 2nd Amendment

back

Are you a Sheeple?

Sheeple (n) - those who are inordinately tolerant, or welcome government intrusion and regulation
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
imported post

trevorthebusdriver wrote:
Commodore76 wrote:
The next step is to plan out the details of the choice we all agreed upon and put our plan into action.

So when do us that couldn't make the meeting find out what the plan is?:)

hi trev; i was there, and all we decided was to inform the public! i dont know why their are no ideas coming in that are better/differant than mine here.

the commodore says keepem comin, but there is a giant sucking sound coming from the group.

thank you Boo Boo for your input on teeshirt phrases, their good enough, and im sure there are other ones that can convay the RTBA/illegal city rules.

and a big BTW Thank you NavyLT for that gun free zone pamphlet, and the case against mayor 5 cents for his illegal hoax/rule to violate our rights.
 

Commodore76

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
255
Location
Curtis, Washington, USA
imported post

2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
trevorthebusdriver wrote:
Commodore76 wrote:
The next step is to plan out the details of the choice we all agreed upon and put our plan into action.

So when do us that couldn't make the meeting find out what the plan is?:)

hi trev; i was there, and all we decided was to inform the public! i dont know why their are no ideas coming in that are better/differant than mine here.

the commodore says keepem comin, but there is a giant sucking sound coming from the group.

thank you Boo Boo for your input on teeshirt phrases, their good enough, and im sure there are other ones that can convay the RTBA/illegal city rules.

and a big BTW Thank you NavyLT for that gun free zone pamphlet, and the case against mayor 5 cents for his illegal hoax/rule to violate our rights.

There is a little bit of a lack of ideas being thrown out. I'm not speaking for everyone, but I'm not creative in a way that would be productive or helpful to the cause. That's why I'm so in favor of other ideas comin in.

If I might suggest that there be a little less attacking or blame and more friendly nudges passed out... something to do with honey as opposed to salt. Especially considering that we're all on the same team!

So, keep the ideas comin, I'll just keep dreaming about how I'd LIKE to see this illegal activity caused by the Mayor changed!

Respectfully,

Commodore
 

usaf0906

New member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
301
Location
, ,
imported post

heresolong wrote:
cbackous wrote:
If indeed this ban is illegal (which it is) just open carry in the parks and then wait to file lawsuit.
Read through the discussions leading up to this point. The concern is that a poorly thought out and executed lawsuit can hurt your cause more than it helps. Make a mistake, lose the lawsuit, and you have just created a legal precedent which then has to be overturned.

Look back and find the post by Gray Peterson about Rosa Parks and how that situation came about.

I read through and see the point that you have about not wanting to set a bad legal precedent. However, the State Attorney General Rob McKenna has already optioned that state law pre-empts local authority to adopt firearms regulations, unless specifically authorized by law.

As I see it, we already have our precedent. Include this with the NRA lawsuit already on file and the issue will be solved pretty soon.

On a side note *"If someone with a gun enters one of those facilities, he or she will be asked by parks employees or Seattle police to leave. If the person won't leave, he or she could be cited or arrested for criminal trespass, according to the mayor's office."* (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010154649_webgunban28m.html)

I know this has been mentioned before, but how can one trespass on public property such as a park (aside from the hours of darkness rules)? When/If they cite you, what LAW would they say you are in violation of?
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
imported post

Commodore76 wrote:
trevorthebusdriver wrote:
Commodore76 wrote:
The next step is to plan out the details of the choice we all agreed upon and put our plan into action.

So when do us that couldn't make the meeting find out what the plan is?:)
There were a few there takin notes. I would PM DEROS72 for specifics.

I'll just keep dreaming about how I'd LIKE to see this illegal activity caused by the Mayor changed!

so how would you like to get this changed?

the sucking sound, might havebeen rude; but the silence is deaffening! nobody has anything to say!?

is deros72 the point man for the innaction we are currently not followinng thru with?

im startin to wonder if the "plan" got voted to be a secret, so our opposition wouldnt know what were upto. coarse non of us would know either!

you wrote in to tell Boo Boo his teeshirt words were too aggressive; but didnt manage to critique the idea of my information stratagy.

if the plans are too sensitive please PM me, it should be safe now as ive changed my name. no commas!
 
Top