Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Bellingham Municipal Code - 2.57.060 - EMERGENCY POWERS OF MAYOR OR DIRECTOR

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Not Here Anymore
    Posts
    346

    Bellingham Municipal Code - 2.57.060 - EMERGENCY POWERS OF MAYOR OR DIRECTOR

    In the event of disaster as provided in this chapter, the Mayor or, in the Mayor's absence, the Director is empowered to do the following:

    A. Make and issue orders which shall have the force of law on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such disaster; provided, however, such orders must be confirmed at the earliest practicable time, and in any event not more than 24 hours after their issuance, by the emergency services council; such orders shall include but not be limited to the following:

    (9) An order prohibiting the carrying or possession of firearms or any instrument which is capable of producing bodily harm and which is carried or possessed with the intent to use the same to cause such harm; provided, that any such order shall not apply to peace officers or military personnel engaged in the performance of their official duties,




    Is this the same thing that Katrina squashed for us? Seems to me that it is still active code and should be either pre-empted by 290 on the state level or (42 U.S.C. 5205) SEC. 706. FIREARMS POLICIES.(a) on the federal level.
    I am the person responsible for myself, my wife and my son. I take that VERY seriously.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Not Here Anymore
    Posts
    346
    It looks like the local guys got 8.04.170 (guns in parks) repealed, but missed out on the emergency powers law.

    http://www.cob.org/web/legilog.nsf/f89aaa69a6908d90882573250066b6c8/7016e138b41cf32e8825753d006c0ed5/$FILE/200901001.pdf
    I am the person responsible for myself, my wife and my son. I take that VERY seriously.

  3. #3
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    Quote Originally Posted by tyguy808 View Post
    In the event of disaster as provided in this chapter, the Mayor or, in the Mayor's absence, the Director is empowered to do the following:

    A. Make and issue orders which shall have the force of law on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such disaster; provided, however, such orders must be confirmed at the earliest practicable time, and in any event not more than 24 hours after their issuance, by the emergency services council; such orders shall include but not be limited to the following:

    (9) An order prohibiting the carrying or possession of firearms or any instrument which is capable of producing bodily harm and which is carried or possessed with the intent to use the same to cause such harm; provided, that any such order shall not apply to peace officers or military personnel engaged in the performance of their official duties,




    Is this the same thing that Katrina squashed for us? Seems to me that it is still active code and should be either pre-empted by 290 on the state level or (42 U.S.C. 5205) SEC. 706. FIREARMS POLICIES.(a) on the federal level.
    Nationwide, there should be no way any one can take your weapon from you, and you should be able to use any means of force to keep them from taking your weapon. Why should they be able to have a law that says they can make it easier for criminals to carry out their illegal activities, especially during a state of emergency when it is more critical than ever that you would need to be able to protect yourself and your family.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Behind Enemy Lines
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by amzbrady View Post
    Nationwide, there should be no way any one can take your weapon from you, and you should be able to use any means of force to keep them from taking your weapon. Why should they be able to have a law that says they can make it easier for criminals to carry out their illegal activities, especially during a state of emergency when it is more critical than ever that you would need to be able to protect yourself and your family.
    My understanding of (42 U.S.C. 5205) is that it restricts federal employees, federalized NG, active military, etc. Not local LE. The Bellingham code is preempted and repealed by RCW 9.41.290.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by fight4your_rights View Post
    My understanding of (42 U.S.C. 5205) is that it restricts federal employees, federalized NG, active military, etc. Not local LE. The Bellingham code is preempted and repealed by RCW 9.41.290.
    "receiving Federal funds" is also in the clause. Does that mean it includes states?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by tyguy808 View Post




    Is this the same thing that Katrina squashed for us? Seems to me that it is still active code and should be either pre-empted by 290 on the state level or (42 U.S.C. 5205) SEC. 706. FIREARMS POLICIES.(a) on the federal level.
    BTW - it's known as 42 U.S.C. 5207

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282
    i'll shoot a mail to the city clerk and Mayor

  8. #8
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    During Hurricane Katrina I had read(e) of firearm owners who could prove they were the legal firearms owner being stripped of their firearms.

    My partner and I talked about this issue a few days ago. I was curious of Marshal Law was imposed, would our CPL, heck, our Constitutional rights be temporarily denied...I looked for a SCOTUS ruling on this question and came up with nothing.

    Any thoughts?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SW WA
    Posts
    127
    Martial Law
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law

    Martial law is the imposition of military rule by military authorities over designated regions on an emergency basis—usually only temporary—when the civilian government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively...
    ...
    Generally, military personnel replace civil authorities and perform some or all of their functions. The constitution could be suspended, and in full-scale martial law, the highest ranking military General would take over, or be installed, as the military governor or as head of the government, thus removing all power from the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the federal government.
    ...
    Typically, the imposition of martial law accompanies curfews, the suspension of civil law, civil rights, habeas corpus, and the application or extension of military law or military justice to civilians.

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

    The article above mention a few times it has been used in the US.
    Last edited by bcp; 06-30-2010 at 03:14 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    I too have done a minimal amount of research on this, I have not located anything relevant to this state.

    HOWEVER numerous states actually have laws that state something to the effect of if martial law is declared the police have no authority to take someones weapons (paraphrasing a few diff laws but that is the gist of them)

    Although the FEDERAL stance is "tough luck hand em over or you will force our trigger fingers" (going off of info from Katrina and such)

    Perhaps we need to get legislation like arizona? (hear me out before you yell at me)

    Arizona passed a bill in 2009 (I believe) which basically stated, if the president declares a national emergency(martial law) we will succeed from the united states, wait till we have a majority of the 50 former united states with us and elect a new president and congress and create a new united states. Oh yeah and every one can keep their guns too.

    Seriously, that is the gist of what it says I forget where I found it but I can try and find it again if some would like...

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    514
    I love the idea of states exercising some sovereignty... including succession if it comes to that.

    I have been told, but don't know for a fact, that Texas is the only state in the Union which has it written into their state Constitution and Articles of Incorporation that they have the right to succeed from the Union any time they choose to, and for any reason.

    Of course, Texas is the only state I am aware of that flies its own flag at equal height to the US flag.

    God Bless TX


  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    282
    there is a bill pending in session (no vote yet) to protect firearm owners in WA during a declared emergency.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    is there a bill online somewhere for my wandering eyes to peruse?

    never mind...My wandering eyes found google...

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...Bills/1832.pdf
    Last edited by devildoc5; 06-30-2010 at 04:46 PM.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410
    Quote Originally Posted by daddy4count View Post
    I love the idea of states exercising some sovereignty... including succession if it comes to that.
    Okay, please forgive me for correcting many of you. I usually don't do this, but for some reason this error gets to me. It is "secession", not "succession".

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SW WA
    Posts
    127
    Martial law is the imposition of military rule by military authorities
    Not the same as any emergency powers declared by the civilian government.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajetpilot View Post
    Okay, please forgive me for correcting many of you. I usually don't do this, but for some reason this error gets to me. It is "secession", not "succession".
    but when we secede we also succeed...

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    514
    Thanks for the correction!


  18. #18
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410
    Quote Originally Posted by devildoc5 View Post
    but when we secede we also succeed...
    True!

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    apparently this bill in DIW (dead in the water) It appears as though it didnot make it through the short session, it can be revived for the long session, however I highly doubt that will be one of the first thing on most politicians minds, then again some of you tha know a little better might be able to talk more about the likelihood of that happening....

Posting Permissions

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