Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 185

Thread: Kent Attorney to Join Fight Against Seattle Gun Ban

  1. #1
    Regular Member Bobarino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    http://westseattle.komonews.com/node/146741

    Man will bring gun to Southwest Community Center tomorrow in protest

    Submitted by Rose Egge on Friday, November 13th, 09:14am

    A Kent man, Bob Warden,has written to the Seattle Parks Department, informing them that he plans to "exercise his right to bear arms" by carrying a holstered Glock pistol to the Southwest Community Center tomorrow at noon.
    His actions are in protest to the City of Seattle's recent decision to ban firearms from certain community centers and parks where children are typically present.
    Warden says he has a current valid State of Washington License to Carry a Concealed Weapon.
    He also writes that he is anattorney, licensed to practice in Washington, and that when he took his Oath of Attorney he promised to support the constitution.
    "Put bluntly, Seattle Parks and Recreation Rule P 060 – 8.14 was promulgated in knowing andblatant violation of state and federal law,"Warden wrote.
    While Warden's plan may sound radical he says that he is not looking for"any kind of uncivil confrontation" and that hewill comply with any instruction given to himby law enforcement personnel or any City of Seattle official.
    Seattle Parks has not yet responded to our request for comment.

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

    more power to him. i'm curious to see what the response from the city will be. if i had tomorrow off, i'd drive up and meet him. i know we're waiting to see what happens with the SAF's complaint/suit but i'm getting somewhat itchy to take action. it's hard to sit around and do nothing.


    Bobby



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    South Puget Sound, Washington, USA
    Posts
    504

    Post imported post

    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/41216...tml?source=rss

    Kent man to challenge Seattle gun ban By SCOTT SUNDE
    SEATTLEPI.COM
    A Kent man has announced that he intends to carry a pistol into a West Seattle community center on Saturday to trigger a lawsuit challenging Seattle's ban on guns in public spaces.
    Bob Warden, 44, announced his intentions in an e-mail Friday morning to media as well as to the City of Seattle, including the police and city attorney.
    "As a courtesy, this is advance notice that at noon tomorrow, Saturday, November 14, I plan to exercise my legal right to bear arms in Seattle's Southwest Community Center, 2801 SW Thistle Street," Warden said in his e-mail. "I will be safely and securely carrying my holstered Glock pistol. I have a current valid State of Washington License to Carry Concealed."
    He also described the Tacoma Rainiers baseball cap he will be wearing so that he can be spotted.
    Seattle parks officials have not yet responded to a request for comment.
    "I'm not looking for any trouble," Warden said in an interview. He said he will comply with whatever instructions police or parks officials give him.
    But whether he is turned away or cited for trespassing, Warden said the incident should give him standing to sue to challenge the ban.
    Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels said on Oct. 14 that guns would be banned on such city facilities as parks and community centers where children gather. Signs banning guns have been posted at city parks.
    Late last month, gun-rights advocates sued, saying the ban violates state law.
    But Warden, a licensed attorney in the state, says he worries that the earlier lawsuit may be thrown out because those who filed it lack legal standing.
    Warden said he does not actively practice law. He said he works in labor relations for the federal government but would not describe his job further.
    He said he is taking the action because he believes the ban is illegal. He noted that the state Attorney General's Office has said so.
    "They know full well it's illegal, but they went ahead and did it anyway," Warden said.
    Warden described himself as a political independent, but a man who has probably voted for only two Republicans in his life.
    He said he is not a member of the National Rifle Association, but was certified by that organization as a pistol instructor. He said he uses the certification in his volunteer work with the Boy Scouts.


  3. #3
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    Manu wrote:
    He also described the Tacoma Rainiers baseball cap he will be wearing so that he can be spotted.
    Since he gave his description, he probable plans on CC. Does his letter stating his intentions provide probable cause to search him for the weapon? Actually, since he is not breaking any laws (just a rule), no crime is afoot. If there is no crime, there is no probable cause to conduct a search.

    I don't think this will amount to anything unless he open carries. Then wemight have a test case.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    Ajetpilot wrote:
    Manu wrote:
    He also described the Tacoma Rainiers baseball cap he will be wearing so that he can be spotted.
    Since he gave his description, he probable plans on CC. Does his letter stating his intentions provide probable cause to search him for the weapon? Actually, since he is not breaking any laws (just a rule), no crime is afoot. If there is no crime, there is no probable cause to conduct a search.

    I don't think this will amount to anything unless he open carries. Then wemight have a test case.
    How many other people will be showing up in tacoma raniers hats, just to mess with...everyone?
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  5. #5
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    How many other people will be showing up in tacoma raniers hats, just to mess with...everyone?

    Great idea, Tawnos. That would be a beautiful sight: fifty guys wearing Tacoma Rainiers hats. If I had one, I would consider joining in the fun.



  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    591

    Post imported post

    where are the dont call the police I'm going out fans? or the don't do it you give us a bad rep group?

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

    http://westseattle.komonews.com/node/146741



  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Port Angeles, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    I say good for him.

  8. #8
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463

    Post imported post

    This is exactly what this group was talking about to begin with until a few talked everyone out of it, and quite easily at that.

    He does not have to be Open Carrying to make this happen, he can calmly make it known he is legally carrying and acting in a responsible manner.

    I feel his statement of having a current CPL is to emphasize he is a legal law abiding citizen for those who will auto translate him as being a gun nut. Granted one should not have to have something to help promotes one legal actions but you know our society and a large part of Seattle Liberalism.

    I am unable to attend tomorrow but for those who support him it would be good to show up be it armed or open holster appearance but showing support would be a positive move in a responsible and respectful manner.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SW WA
    Posts
    127

    Post imported post

    Someone needs to be nearby with a video camera.

    Bruce

  10. #10
    Regular Member SpyderTattoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,018

    Post imported post

    Am I the only one to notice in the guy's quote that he doesn't think the SAF lawsuit has any legal ground to stand on, then later says that the Attorney General says that this ban is illegal? Does this sound a little weird?



    "But Warden, a licensed attorney in the state, says he worries that the earlier lawsuit may be thrown out because those who filed it lack legal standing."



    "Put bluntly, Seattle Parks and Recreation Rule P 060 – 8.14 was promulgated in knowing andblatant violation of state and federal law,"Warden wrote.



    So how does the SAF/NRA lawsuit not have any legal standing? Same standing this guy has... What's the difference? Kinda' strange.


    Certified Glock Armorer

    "A government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..." -- Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)

    A 1911 that works properly is as rare as a Glock that doesn't.

  11. #11
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    This is not what was agreed on at the last meeting.Igt will do us no good what so ever.I recieved a call from Dave Workman to advise that this individual will get no support from SAF or anyone else.We are to let the law suit proceed.As Dave said after it was filed they had 20 days to respond .We will wait it out.We will also not support anyone in these actions.In fact If this turns negative since KIRO and KOMO know me and have asked me to keep them informed I will contact them and advise the the group from the meeting on the 25th do not support his actions.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    DEROS72 wrote:
    This is not what was agreed on at the last meeting.Igt will do us no good what so ever.I recieved a call from Dave Workman to advise that this individual will get no support from SAF or anyone else.We are to let the law suit proceed.As Dave said after it was filed they had 20 days to respond .We will wait it out.We will also not support anyone in these actions.
    This is not any of us, so what we agreed not to do doesn't matter. This is a lawyer acting on his own behest.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    SpyderTattoo wrote:
    So how does the SAF/NRA lawsuit not have any legal standing? Same standing this guy has... What's the difference? Kinda' strange.
    I'm not absolutely sure, but I believe you need to show some kind of injury due to the illegal action to have standing.

    much like the heller case with the other plaintiffs that were removed from the scotus lawsuit.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Bobarino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    i think he has a point with regards to the SAF's plaintiffs not having standing. they were never kicked out off of a Seattle property for carrying. Much like in Heller. first it was Parker et aal, but Heller was the only one that was found to have standing in the case since he had applied to register his handgun and was denied. i think the SAF should have done the same thing with one or more of their plaintiffs that this guy is doing. i get the feeling that the SAF's current plaintiffs may be found to not have standing and they may even end up representing this guy.

    Bobby

    edit: beat me by two minutes

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    144

    Post imported post

    NavyLT wrote:
    It would be really interesting if he open carried and conveniently left his ID and CPL in his vehicle :-).
    I accidentally leave my wallet in the car all the time which contains my license and CPL, it doesn't fit in my pants pocket while driving too well.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    How many other people will be showing up in tacoma raniers hats, just to mess with...everyone?
    "No... I'm Bob Warden!"


  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    Bobarino wrote:
    i think he has a point with regards to the SAF's plaintiffs not having standing. they were never kicked out off of a Seattle property for carrying. Much like in Heller. first it was Parker et aal, but Heller was the only one that was found to have standing in the case since he had applied to register his handgun and was denied. i think the SAF should have done the same thing with one or more of their plaintiffs that this guy is doing. i get the feeling that the SAF's current plaintiffs may be found to not have standing and they may even end up representing this guy.

    Bobby

    edit: beat me by two minutes
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.36.070

    Unlike Heller, the people represented by SAF can claim that they are being materially impacted and are being induced to "abstain from conduct which [they have] legal right to engage in" and are thus under coercion of law.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    Bobarino wrote:
    i think he has a point with regards to the SAF's plaintiffs not having standing. they were never kicked out off of a Seattle property for carrying. Much like in Heller. first it was Parker et aal, but Heller was the only one that was found to have standing in the case since he had applied to register his handgun and was denied. i think the SAF should have done the same thing with one or more of their plaintiffs that this guy is doing. i get the feeling that the SAF's current plaintiffs may be found to not have standing and they may even end up representing this guy.

    Bobby

    edit: beat me by two minutes
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.36.070

    Unlike Heller, the people represented by SAF can claim that they are being materially impacted and are being induced to "abstain from conduct which [they have] legal right to engage in" and are thus under coercion of law.
    go Washington with a good law.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    bcp wrote:
    Someone needs to be nearby with a video camera.

    Bruce
    KIRO and KOMO both know that there is a story here. I'm betting that they will be there with cameras rolling.

  20. #20
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    AS I said I got a call from Dave Workman and he said this guy is on his own. They absolutley will not .I don't think at this time it is the right course of action.Not just yet. If I seeThe TVcoverage I will call them and tell themThe Open Carry does not stand with him in this and is not affiliated with us..As we agreed on the 25th meeting when wehadthose thatwanted to do the same thing.We decided that we would wait.Their may be a time for it ,but not yet.
    This is one guy trying to make a name for himself and get some face time on TV.It will backfire bigtime.If this guy is an attorney he can't be that smart.

    Besides if we do it it will be huge.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    591

    Post imported post

    its nice to see that hes standing up for his and everyones right. why even bring the SAF into this? this has nothing to do with their lawsuit. glad an attorney is going to do it since everyone else was scared. now there will be pressident and the state will get involved.

    hurah!!

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    If I see The TV coverage I will call them and tell them The (sic) Open Carry does not stand with him in this.
    "The meeting" notwithstanding, since when do "we" not support a law abiding citizen in his petition to the government for a redress of his legitimate grievance?

    I find this premature disowning of him disturbing.

    If he gets in any trouble, and the media calls on us for comment, I would say "What he did was legal. He should not have gotten in trouble. We wish him well with his case. He is not part of our loosely organized group."

    I would not cold-call the media and put a negative spin on his actions, if he does what he describes in the article.

    Gun owners attacking gun owners. We are very quickly getting close to that in this thread. It's wrong.

    If anyone contacts the media, would you mind specifically mentioning that you don't speak for me, Dean Fuller, of Lake Tapps, Washington? Thanks.

  23. #23
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    We are taking a stand.For the moment.As I said there may come a time for this action but it isn't yet.I would be the first to do the same thing but i'm going to wait a little while longer and see the suit through for the time being.I'm not saying we don't support other gun owners just this particular course of action at this time while the suit is pending.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Port Angeles, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    DEROS72 wrote:
    This is not what was agreed on at the last meeting.Igt will do us no good what so ever.I recieved a call from Dave Workman to advise that this individual will get no support from SAF or anyone else.We are to let the law suit proceed.As Dave said after it was filed they had 20 days to respond .We will wait it out.We will also not support anyone in these actions.In fact If this turns negative since KIRO and KOMO know me and have asked me to keep them informed I will contact them and advise the the group from the meeting on the 25th do not support his actions.
    He'll get any support from me that he asks for. I always stand with those who thumb their nose at tyrrany.

    I don't think anyone on this board has he right to speak for what "we" will or won't support.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    DEROS72 wrote:
    We are taking a stand.

    No, it seems that you and Dave Workman are taking a stand. I will continue to support, financially and otherwise, gun owners who exercisetheir rights under Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution. I find it sad that SAF and others pledge to do otherwise. It seems very hypocritical.

    Please add my name, Bruce Johnston of Olalla, WA to the list of those for whom you do not speak.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •