Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Seattle BAN Gone, Now let’s finish the Job in Snohomish County

  1. #1
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    As we see below, the ban is lifted in Seattle, now let’s get our phonecalls in and letter's to the Snohomish Council and demand they pass Councilman Kosters Amendments.They said they were waiting to see how Seattle went, well now they have it, and must comply. And everywhere else in Washington!

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/38103.html
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  2. #2
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    jbone wrote:
    As we see below, the ban is lifted in Seattle, now let’s get our phonecalls in and letter's to the Snohomish Council and demand they pass Councilman Kosters Amendments.They said they were waiting to see how Seattle went, well now they have it, and must comply. And everywhere else in Washington!

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/38103.html
    i think that now they are just going to wait to see how the appeal turns out!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  3. #3
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    That would suck!
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  4. #4
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    jbone wrote:
    That would suck!
    That pretty much sums up Snohomish County Government!
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Right now there is no appeal and the injunction stands. Let's hit them before an appeal, if any, is filed. Also event if there is an appeal that does not automatically mean the injunction is put on hold. The state court would have to grant a stay of the injunction.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  6. #6
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    Just filing an appeal doesn't automatically mean a court will hear it. There has to be a compelling reason such as an error in the original courts ruling or new evidence. Just "not getting things your way" doesn't always mean there was any error at the lower court level.

    Things are kind of going against Seattle. State Law, and AG's opinion, and now a Summary Judgement. Maybe they should just shut up and get about their next task. Maybe that should be something like figuring out how to live within their means as a Government and not waste time and money on cases like this.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    amlevin wrote:
    Just filing an appeal doesn't automatically mean a court* will hear it.* There has to be a compelling reason such as an error in the original courts ruling or new evidence.* Just "not getting things your way" doesn't always mean there was any error at the lower court level.

    Things are kind of going against Seattle.* State Law, and AG's opinion, and now a Summary Judgement.* Maybe they should just shut up and get about their next task.* Maybe that should be something like figuring out how to live within their means as a Government and not waste time and money on cases like this.
    Agreed but I think McGinn may very well try to file.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Here is my letter to them in light of the ruling by Judge Shaffer. I am holding off on sending it to hear any comments.

    Dear Council Members,

    I am sure you are aware that King County Superior Court Judge Catherin Shaffer has ruled that the Seattle Parks Department Rule P 060-8.14 is null and void under Washington State Law RCW9.41.290. Her ruling also stated that Washington State residents "have a clear legal and equitable right to carry firearms under federal and state constitutions."

    You have had the opportunity in the previous month to repair Snohomish County Code 22.16.090 which restricts the possession of firearms in county parks. In light of this ruling by Judge Shaffer I am hereby requesting that you re-visit the proposal from Councilman Koster that was in front of you on Jan. 13th to revise SCC 22.16.090 to be in line and not more restrictive than State Law.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  9. #9
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    Here is my letter to them in light of the ruling by Judge Shaffer. I am holding off on sending it to hear any comments.

    Dear Council Members,

    I am sure you are aware that King County Superior Court Judge Catherin Shaffer has ruled that the Seattle Parks Department Rule P 060-8.14 is null and void under Washington State Law RCW9.41.290. Her ruling also stated that Washington State residents "have a clear legal and equitable right to carry firearms under federal and state constitutions."

    You have had the opportunity in the previous month to repair Snohomish County Code 22.16.090 which restricts the possession of firearms in county parks. In light of this ruling by Judge Shaffer I am hereby requesting that you re-visit the proposal from Councilman Koster that was in front of you on Jan. 13th to revise SCC 22.16.090 to be in line and not more restrictive than State Law.
    Nice letter but I doubt they will. Why should they? There's no penalty for them passing or retaining any law contrary to State Law. It's just not enforceable. The council members are not subject to any penalty under "current" state law. Not that's something that should be visited. If the Legislature won't take care of it maybe it's time for an Initiative.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645

    Post imported post

    Ahh but there IS a penalty!

    One could easily read that violation of pre-emption is a misdemeanor, however the council members would claim qualified immunity.

    The one I beleive applies is much more severe and one cannot claim qualiifed immunity! Unfortunaly you will never convince the prosecutor to actually enforce the law. (Which technically makes him/her also guilty).

    RCW 9A.80.010, defines “Official Misconduct” and makes it a gross misdemeanor.

    Under this statute, 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.

    To quote Dave Workman:

    Public officials are fond of reminding citizens – when the occasion and circumstances suit their personal agenda, that is – that we live in a society of law, and whether we like or agree with a law, we must obey it. Have Snohomish County's Democrat members of the county council engaged in official misconduct? Some gun rights advocates apparently think so.

  11. #11
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    Right Wing Wacko wrote:
    Ahh but there IS a penalty!

    One could easily read that violation of pre-emption is a misdemeanor, however the council members would claim qualified immunity.

    The one I beleive applies is much more severe and one cannot claim qualiifed immunity! Unfortunaly you will never convince the prosecutor to actually enforce the law. (Which technically makes him/her also guilty).

    RCW 9A.80.010, defines “Official Misconduct” and makes it a gross misdemeanor.

    Under this statute, 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.

    To quote Dave Workman:

    Public officials are fond of reminding citizens – when the occasion and circumstances suit their personal agenda, that is – that we live in a society of law, and whether we like or agree with a law, we must obey it. Have Snohomish County's Democrat members of the county council engaged in official misconduct? Some gun rights advocates apparently think so.
    They will merely claim that they were not attempting to obtain benefit and further, that their intent is to merely protect citizens.

    A SPECIFIC penalty clause should be attached to 9.41.290 so that they have no weasel room.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    amlevin wrote:
    joeroket wrote:
    Here is my letter to them in light of the ruling by Judge Shaffer. I am holding off on sending it to hear any comments.

    Dear Council Members,

    I am sure you are aware that King County Superior Court Judge Catherin Shaffer has ruled that the Seattle Parks Department Rule P 060-8.14 is null and void under Washington State Law RCW9.41.290. Her ruling also stated that Washington State residents "have a clear legal and equitable right to carry firearms under federal and state constitutions."

    You have had the opportunity in the previous month to repair Snohomish County Code 22.16.090 which restricts the possession of firearms in county parks. In light of this ruling by Judge Shaffer I am hereby requesting that you re-visit the proposal from Councilman Koster that was in front of you on Jan. 13th to revise SCC 22.16.090 to be in line and not more restrictive than State Law.
    Nice letter but I doubt they will.* Why should they?* There's no penalty for them passing or retaining any law contrary to State Law.* It's just not enforceable.* The council members are not subject to any penalty under "current" state law.* Not that's something that should be visited.* If the Legislature won't take care of it maybe it's time for an Initiative.
    I could not agree more. I just don't want to be the guy saying we need to do something about it and not acting to attempt it.

    If we can show that they intentionally kept a null and void law that restricts the possession of firearms in the parks then I will take it to the a contact of mine at the AG's office and see what can be done. That office would have the power to do something at that point. Whether or not they will is another story.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

Posting Permissions

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