• 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.

Seattle Mayor wants legislature to give up its authority...to him!!!

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

Seattle mayor wants law changed so he can make own rules

Mike McGinn must drink the same water as ex-Mayor Greg Nickels. Both believe Seattle should be a feifdom that sets its own laws, and curtails a civil right at whim.


McGinn wants state Legislature to amend preemption statute, give up some of its authority to HIM!

http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seatt...make-own-rules

Or try this:

http://tinyurl.com/y97yqg9
 

SpyderTattoo

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
1,015
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

Thanks again, Dave, for your reporting on this.

I think it's ironic how the judge said that the plaintif's didn't have standing... The reason Bob Warden (?) said he went to the community center open carrying just to get kicked out and have standing to sue.

It works out for all of us in the end. :dude:
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

SpyderTattoo wrote:
Thanks again, Dave, for your reporting on this. 

I think it's ironic how the judge said that the plaintif's didn't have standing...   The reason Bob Warden (?) said he went to the community center open carrying just to get kicked out and have standing to sue. 

It works out for all of us in the end.   :dude:

Mr. Warden carried concealed. He advised the parks people in advance he was coming.
 

5jeffro7

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
172
Location
Mountlake Terrace, Washington, USA
imported post

dave, too bad you can't combine mcginn's attitude with the most recently reported felony fraud conviction :)

he seems to be so quick to point the finger, WTH is he even doing/or allowed to remain in office with such a conviction that he neglected to disclose...sounds a bit like deception to me

5J7
 

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

So it seems there will be no appeal, since McGinn has publicly stated that he agrees with the court in it's interpretation of 9.41.290:

"RCW 9.41.290, which preempts Seattle from regulating the possession of firearms."
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

5jeffro7 wrote:
dave, too bad you can't combine mcginn's attitude with the most recently reported felony fraud conviction :)

he seems to be so quick to point the finger, WTH is he even doing/or allowed to remain in office with such a conviction that he neglected to disclose...sounds a bit like deception to me

5J7

What are you talking about?
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

deanf wrote:
So it seems there will be no appeal, since McGinn has publicly stated that he agrees with the court in it's interpretation of 9.41.290:

"RCW 9.41.290, which preempts Seattle from regulating the possession of firearms."

And what are you talking about?
I presume you're getting this from his desire to change the state law.
That's a stretch from "publicly stated that he agrees with the court."
 

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

In your article you quote him as agreeing that 9.41.270 keeps Seattle from regulating guns.

That's also what the court said.

So if he agrees with what the court said, why would he appeal?
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

Dave Workman wrote:
5jeffro7 wrote:
dave, too bad you can't combine mcginn's attitude with the most recently reported felony fraud conviction :)

he seems to be so quick to point the finger, WTH is he even doing/or allowed to remain in office with such a conviction that he neglected to disclose...sounds a bit like deception to me

5J7

What are you talking about?

Not sure if this is what jeffro is refering to:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010986793_bushnell05m.html
 

Lammo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
580
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

deanf wrote:
In your article you quote him as agreeing that 9.41.270 keeps Seattle from regulating guns.

That's also what the court said.

So if he agrees with what the court said, why would he appeal?
Because he's an arrogant a** who should suffer the same fate as Nickels in four years, but I digress. The City would appeal to try to get the Court of Apples or the Court of Final Error to overturn the pre-emption statute. If they could get such a ruling then they could do whatever the heck they want to and force us to risk arrest and then rely solely on constitutional arguments.
 

Bookman

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
1,424
Location
Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
imported post

Nickels was from Chicago. McGinn is from New York. I see a weird pattern here. Poland used to get their leaders from outside their own borders, too. Look at what happened to them throughout history. They once disappeared from the map for (I think) about 100 years.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

He isn't alone, we must be watchful of this. Bellingham is in favor of changing state law and has stated they would lobby Olympia for the right to make these rules. I am positive that many officials of our most populated cities will agree with Seattle's mayor.
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
He isn't alone, we must be watchful of this. Bellingham is in favor of changing state law and has stated they would lobby Olympia for the right to make these rules. I am positive that many officials of our most populated cities will agree with Seattle's mayor.

Well, then, it's up to you to challenge them and replace them with people who agree with Judge Shaffer.

;)
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Dave Workman wrote:
sudden valley gunner wrote:
He isn't alone, we must be watchful of this. Bellingham is in favor of changing state law and has stated they would lobby Olympia for the right to make these rules. I am positive that many officials of our most populated cities will agree with Seattle's mayor.

Well, then, it's up to you to challenge them and replace them with people who agree with Judge Shaffer.

;)
We are working on it.:D

Whatcom county for the first time in a very long time has a majority conservative counsel.
 

amlevin

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

These Mayors forget the reason behind RCW 9.41.290. It was enacted so there would not be a different law in every City or County of the State. Seems like this is just exactly what the Mayors are arguing for, different rules for them regardless of the rest of the State.

Mayor McGinn is an example of the old saying "People elect the government they deserve". Seattle deserves dumbasses like him.
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

amlevin wrote:
These Mayors forget the reason behind RCW 9.41.290.  It was enacted so there would not be a different law in every City or County of the State.  Seems like this is just exactly what the Mayors are arguing for, different rules for them regardless of the rest of the State.

Mayor McGinn is an example of the old saying "People elect the government they deserve".  Seattle deserves dumbasses like him.

Yeah, well the rest of us don't, and that's essentially what we'd have if this POS New Yawker convinces the Legislature to hand over its authority to him.

Your comment might just be the inspiration for my next Examiner column. Don't worry, there will be a bad guy, and you ain't him.

;)
 

5jeffro7

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
172
Location
Mountlake Terrace, Washington, USA
imported post

Dave Workman wrote:
5jeffro7 wrote:
dave, too bad you can't combine mcginn's attitude with the most recently reported felony fraud conviction :)

he seems to be so quick to point the finger, WTH is he even doing/or allowed to remain in office with such a conviction that he neglected to disclose...sounds a bit like deception to me

5J7

What are you talking about?
I could have sworn that friday, on the way to work, there was a blurb on the radio about McGinn having a felony fraud conviction that wasn't disclosed in any of his political paperwork...I may have heard wrong, blended several stories together or totally imagined things; which is entirely possible, having been running on 3 hours of sleep :lol:
 

1245A Defender

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

5jeffro7 wrote:
Dave Workman wrote:
5jeffro7 wrote:
dave, too bad you can't combine mcginn's attitude with the most recently reported felony fraud conviction :)

he seems to be so quick to point the finger, WTH is he even doing/or allowed to remain in office with such a conviction that he neglected to disclose...sounds a bit like deception to me

5J7

What are you talking about?
I could have sworn that friday, on the way to work, there was a blurb on the radio about McGinn having a felony fraud conviction that wasn't disclosed in any of his political paperwork...I may have heard wrong, blended several stories together or totally imagined things; which is entirely possible, having been running on 3 hours of sleep :lol:
i do believe that it is one of his advisers or somebody like that in his inner circle that didnt disclose a conviction for some missdeed in the past.
but, and its a big but,,, the mayor did in fact know about it personally, and also kept it to him self, thats worse than the deed it self!
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
imported post

1245A Defender wrote:
i do believe that it is one of his advisers or somebody like that in his inner circle that didnt disclose a conviction for some missdeed in the past.
but, and its a big but,,, the mayor did in fact know about it personally, and also kept it to him self, thats worse than the deed it self!

Well, let's not do a bunch of speculating here.

Let's stick to what we actually know, and can document.
 
Top