• 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 still trying to restrict guns in parks

Difdi

Difdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
987
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
The city claims to be doing it to protect vulnerable residents...from what, they don't say. The implication, obviously, is that CPL holders like to shoot the town up, so the city must stop them. Except...that doesn't ever happen. I suppose they could be trying to keep children safe from criminals, but generally speaking, criminals aren't called that because of their deep and profound respect for and obedience to laws.

Is the city really (intentionally or otherwise) asserting they need to protect citizens from state statutes and the state Constitution?
 
D

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
Familiar theme in Seattle’s ‘living in denial’ Supreme Court petition

The City of Seattle is arguing that a state appeals court “misread” earlier case law regarding Washington State’s model preemption act, which sounds vaguely reminiscent of what the gun prohibition lobby contended after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 landmark Second Amendment ruling in District of Columbia v. Dick Anthony Heller.

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-...eattle-s-living-denial-supreme-court-petition
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Difdi said:
The city claims to be doing it to protect vulnerable residents...from what, they don't say. The implication, obviously, is that CPL holders like to shoot the town up, so the city must stop them. Except...that doesn't ever happen. I suppose they could be trying to keep children safe from criminals, but generally speaking, criminals aren't called that because of their deep and profound respect for and obedience to laws.

Is the city really (intentionally or otherwise) asserting they need to protect citizens from state statutes and the state Constitution?
Click to expand...

Why don't they put the time and effort into protecting the Citizens of Seattle from the Police Department????

shoulder_shrug.jpg
 
MadHatter66

MadHatter66

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
320
Location
Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
I am actually curious if the state Supreme Court is even going to hear the case after a unanimous decision by the appeals court. They do have that option as well. OTOH this could potentially be a big loss if this was to be heard and end up going south for whatever reason. Or if the courts were to decide that parks are "sensitive area's" While I don't think that is what is going to happen, there is always the possibility of it.
 
FMCDH

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
.45ACPaddy said:
The courts have already decided against the city twice! What are they hoping for, third time's a charm?
Click to expand...

Essentially, they don't see a downside to pushing on.

They are not paying the bill, so they can point their voters to that, so they really have nothing to loose. They have already lost in the courts, so they figure they press on and it either gets shot down by WSSC, in which case they press on to the legislature for a law change (which they plan to do anyway) or they win on a lark, and they can approach the legislature with that win in hand on the same subject.

Its really not so hard to understand their thought process.
 
hermannr

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
I do not for one minute believe that this appeal will be "free" to the citizens of Seattle. I would bet that the law firm that is handling this has been promised a sizeable amount of business, the city attorney is diverting his time (paid for by Seattle tax payers) the filing fees I bet will be paid for by Seattle, and when they loose, or even if the appeal is denied, there will be SAF etc cost's that will be have to be paid.

The only thing "free" is the lies the lawyers and politicos put out.
 
S

superdeluxe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
58
Location
Puyallup, ,
The Local governments tell us they have budget crisis, and have to layoff firefighters and police officers, but then they find the money for non-sense lawsuits like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top