JohnRich 4 #1 February 14, 2010 News: Judge's ruling ends Seattle's gun ban A King County Superior Court judge ruled that the city of Seattle ban on guns on city property is illegal, effectively ending the ban. King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer issued the ruling Friday afternoon after the plaintiff’s filed a motion for Summary Judgment and prevailed. The court's ruling was based on a state law, which preempts Seattle from regulating the possession of firearms. The plaintiff's attorney said the win is a statement that municipalities, like Seattle, are not above the law. According to the judgment, the city must stop enforcing the gun ban by Feb. 17. They also have 30 days to take down the "No Guns" signs posted at parks and community centers around town.Source: http://www.king5.com/news/local/Judges-ruling-ends-Seattles-gun-ban-84272067.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #2 February 14, 2010 Quote News: Judge's ruling ends Seattle's gun ban A King County Superior Court judge ruled that the city of Seattle ban on guns on city property is illegal, effectively ending the ban. King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer issued the ruling Friday afternoon after the plaintiff’s filed a motion for Summary Judgment and prevailed. The court's ruling was based on a state law, which preempts Seattle from regulating the possession of firearms. The plaintiff's attorney said the win is a statement that municipalities, like Seattle, are not above the law. According to the judgment, the city must stop enforcing the gun ban by Feb. 17. They also have 30 days to take down the "No Guns" signs posted at parks and community centers around town. Source: http://www.king5.com/news/local/Judges-ruling-ends-Seattles-gun-ban-84272067.html Told gya so.... http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3403631#3403631 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hwt 0 #3 February 14, 2010 I do not own a gun but what part of the 2nd amendment do these people fail to understand? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tr027 0 #4 February 14, 2010 Nice! good news for a change "The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #5 February 14, 2010 WA state law clearly states that a city or county cannot have gun laws more restrictive than the state laws. My guess is that this is just the beginning stage of an attempt change the state law. "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #6 February 14, 2010 QuoteWA state law clearly states that a city or county cannot have gun laws more restrictive than the state laws. My guess is that this is just the beginning stage of an attempt change the state law. When it's clear that the state won't go for it, then these sort try to do it at the city level, even when they know it violates the state constitution. SF did it in 2005 as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #7 February 15, 2010 QuoteWA state law clearly states that a city or county cannot have gun laws more restrictive than the state laws. My guess is that this is just the beginning stage of an attempt change the state law. The proper way to change state law is in the state legislature. Not by simply enacting a city ordinance which is in violation of that state law. And then wasting the taxpayers money to defend a lawsuit which they will clearly lose. It kind of demonstrates how the anti-gun folks have no respect for law, and will stop at nothing to get their way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #8 February 16, 2010 QuoteQuoteWA state law clearly states that a city or county cannot have gun laws more restrictive than the state laws. My guess is that this is just the beginning stage of an attempt change the state law. The proper way to change state law is in the state legislature. Not by simply enacting a city ordinance which is in violation of that state law. And then wasting the taxpayers money to defend a lawsuit which they will clearly lose. It kind of demonstrates how the anti-gun folks have no respect for law, and will stop at nothing to get their way. +1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #9 February 16, 2010 QuoteIt kind of demonstrates how the anti-gun folks have no respect for law, and will stop at nothing to get their way. John, I'm with you on your goal of protecting the 2nd. Making statements like that just makes you look like a zealot who has no interest in even listening to people with other points of view. If you're trying to convert people to your way of thinking (and I assume you are otherwise why keep posting), you should realize that statements like that are very off-putting. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #10 February 16, 2010 Quote Making statements like that just makes you look like a zealot who has no interest in even listening to people with other points of view. Well, this is true.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #11 February 16, 2010 QuoteQuoteIt kind of demonstrates how the anti-gun folks have no respect for law, and will stop at nothing to get their way. John, I'm with you on your goal of protecting the 2nd. Making statements like that just makes you look like a zealot who has no interest in even listening to people with other points of view. If you're trying to convert people to your way of thinking (and I assume you are otherwise why keep posting), you should realize that statements like that are very off-putting. I think I made an accurate description of the Seattle anti-gun zealots, who knowingly enacted a city law that was in violation of state law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #12 February 16, 2010 Then you should have made it clear that you were only refering to the people on the Seattle city council. That's not at all what you said. Surely you don't believe that everyone who is not as strongly in favor of a liberal (note small "l") reading of the 2nd as you are has NO respect for law? If you do, then I suggest you take a step back and reassess. I'm just trying to help you improve the effectiveness of your message. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #13 February 16, 2010 QuoteQuoteIt kind of demonstrates how the anti-gun folks have no respect for law, and will stop at nothing to get their way. John, I'm with you on your goal of protecting the 2nd. Making statements like that just makes you look like a zealot who has no interest in even listening to people with other points of view. If you're trying to convert people to your way of thinking (and I assume you are otherwise why keep posting), you should realize that statements like that are very off-putting. There's really no reason to compromise with that ilk. They take your compromise and then ask for more. The same sort of assholes passed the SF handgun ban, even when all the CA politicians admitted it was unconstitutional and would be struck down. And that's what happened, at a cost of millions to the city. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #14 February 17, 2010 QuoteThere's really no reason to compromise with that ilk. listen to != compromise - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 February 17, 2010 QuoteQuoteThere's really no reason to compromise with that ilk. listen to != compromise When the sum total of their argument is 'get rid of the guns', gun owners should listen, why?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #16 February 17, 2010 Because that's not the sum total of their argument. If you'd listen, you'd know this. And because not listening makes gun owners look like assholes. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #17 February 17, 2010 QuoteBecause that's not the sum total of their argument. If you'd listen, you'd know this. Disagree - for quite a number of them, that *IS* the sum total of their argument.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #18 February 17, 2010 QuoteBecause that's not the sum total of their argument. If you'd listen, you'd know this. This was the exact sum total of their argument, until they cost the Democrats the White House (one of several last straws that made the difference) Since they, the scumbags have learned to keep their mouth shut, but the agenda remains unchanged. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #19 February 17, 2010 That's for making my point. Keep preaching to the choir, you certainly aren't going to win any converts with that attitude. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #20 February 17, 2010 QuoteThat's for making my point. Keep preaching to the choir, you certainly aren't going to win any converts with that attitude. Stop pretending you're new here. Winning coverts? harhar. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 425 #21 February 18, 2010 Gun ban. Shot down. That's funny!Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
