• 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.

What exactly is "Seattle's Gun Ban"?

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

What exactly does the Seattle ordinance saw regarding gun possession?

I haven't really been on the forum lately.

I have my CPL. If I CC in Seattle on public property (roads, parks, etc) am I within the law?
 

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

It's not a law, it's a Parks Department rule that says you cannot carry a gun on any parks property that is likely to have children present and has been posted with signs as such.

The Washington State Supreme Court declared the rule illegal. Federal court ruled it constitutional.

The federal court got it wrong. I do not know what it's legal status is now.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

j2l3 wrote:
It's not a law, it's a Parks Department rule that says you cannot carry a gun on any parks property that is likely to have children present and has been posted with signs as such.

The Washington State Supreme Court declared the rule illegal.  Federal court ruled it constitutional.

The federal court got it wrong.  I do not know what it's legal status is now.

Actually it was King County Superior that ruled the ban as unenforceable. Also the judge in Warden did get it right based on the claims that Warden was making.

The legal status is that it is null and void.
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

j2l3 wrote:
It's not a law, it's a Parks Department rule that says you cannot carry a gun on any parks property that is likely to have children present and has been posted with signs as such.

The Washington State Supreme Court declared the rule illegal. Federal court ruled it constitutional.

The federal court got it wrong. I do not know what it's legal status is now.
Seeing how Seattle is "City Limits", which falls under city jurisdiction, I wonder what the Seattle municipal court judges feel about this "rule"?, seeing how they're the first judges that will preside over such a case.
 

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

Since the Superior Court has already ruled on it. The city attourny is unlikely to file charges. However, this will not stop the police from arresting and sending the report to the city attourney office.
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

j2l3 wrote:
Since the Superior Court has already ruled on it. The city attourny is unlikely to file charges. However, this will not stop the police from arresting and sending the report to the city attourney office.
Incorrect. The only 'enforcement action' that could be taken would be for the armed individual being asked to leave the premises. If said party refused, they would be cited for trespassing. No arresting going to happen for carrying on a CPL. Seattle PD is not dumb. They know the law (state preemption).
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

j2l3 wrote:
A CPL has no bearing on the situation.
Well according to Washington State Law, a city may create an ordinance to restrict the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, with the exception of those in possession of a CPL.
 

ForceofWill

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
46
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, ,
imported post

Ya I was under the impression that state preemption was just that. I was suprised to read Seattle was still giving you guys trouble. That said, I have oc'ed three days in downtown Seattle walking the entire city and never had a problem. I've walked by 5 seperate SPD, only reaction was a double take by one but he didn't say anything. I don't remember seeing a sign in the park by the market area. I think that's the only park I was in though.
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:
j2l3 wrote:
A CPL has no bearing on the situation.
Well according to Washington State Law, a city may create an ordinance to restrict the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, with the exception of those in possession of a CPL.
It says nothing about those in possession of a CPL. It says that the restrictions do not apply to one who is licensed, not one who possesses the license upon them. Something worth considering in case an issue ever comes up.
 

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

Tawnos wrote:
Aaron1124 wrote:
j2l3 wrote:
A CPL has no bearing on the situation.
Well according to Washington State Law, a city may create an ordinance to restrict the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, with the exception of those in possession of a CPL.
It says nothing about those in possession of a CPL. It says that the restrictions do not apply to one who is licensed, not one who possesses the license upon them. Something worth considering in case an issue ever comes up.
(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

(i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060;

RCW 9.41.070
Concealed pistol license

Either way, that's what I meant. I'm not trying to get technical or anything.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:
Tawnos wrote:
Aaron1124 wrote:
j2l3 wrote:
A CPL has no bearing on the situation.
Well according to Washington State Law, a city may create an ordinance to restrict the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, with the exception of those in possession of a CPL.
It says nothing about those in possession of a CPL. It says that the restrictions do not apply to one who is licensed, not one who possesses the license upon them. Something worth considering in case an issue ever comes up.
     (b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality, except that such restrictions shall not apply to:

     (i) Any pistol in the possession of a person licensed under RCW 9.41.070 or exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060;

RCW 9.41.070
Concealed pistol license

Either way, that's what I meant. I'm not trying to get technical or anything.

A cpl has nothing to do with the now defunct park ban. Parks do not fall under that statute. They are neither a stadium or convention center.
 
Top