And another wanna-be dictator with a 'dream'.
Quote:
Story Here
Nickels makes gun ban official and the public reacts
October 15, 9:08 AM
Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman
Outgoing Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels yesterday (Oct. 14) made it official: He announced that city park properties will be posted off limits to firearms, even those guns that are legally carried by law-abiding citizens.
Public reaction to the move has been overwhelmingly negative, much the same as it was during the public comment period that ended Oct. 4. KOMO's Ken Schram is not pleased with Nickels, either. I wrote about public reaction here, and was not surprised that Bob Scales, senior policy analyst for the city’s Office of Policy and Management, somewhat dismissed the huge negative reaction in a remark to SeattlePostGlobe.org because “65% of the comments were from outside Seattle.”
Scales, reached by the PostGlobe, noted those numbers were essentially correct. But he noted "65% of the comments were from outside Seattle. We got a lot of negative comments after the NRA posted a link to our comment page on their website."
So what? Don’t people from outside Seattle have a voice? After all, many of them may work in the city, many more may visit and will be directly affected, especially if they come to participate in, or watch, athletic events at these park facilities, or simply enjoy a day in the park.
It was disappointing to read in Kery Murakami’s PostGlobe report this morning that Scales – reacting to the figures published in this space the other day – said those numbers were essentially correct.
Not “essentially correct,” they are correct, as supplied by Bob via e-mail and confirmed in a telephone conversation. That’s like stating that “Bob and Kery are essentially nice guys…even though 65% of the people who think so are not related to them.”
It has been widely reported in this space and elsewhere that Attorney General Rob McKenna has advised Mayor Nickels that this ban would be illegal under state statute.
That brings up a serious question:
Knowing that the Attorney General has advised that this gun ban is illegal, are Seattle police officers going to enforce the ban?
This might fall under a legal term: Acting under color of law. According to a couple of websites here and here, this is a crime when it involves depriving someone of their civil rights protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. It is not clear how this shakes out legally, if police enforce a local regulation that is not even adopted in the form of an ordinance, which the Attorney General has already said is illegal.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled earlier this year that the Second Amendment applies to the states. That ruling is now “on hold” while the Ninth Circuit mulls the question once again, and while the U.S. Supreme Court waits to consider a challenge to the Chicago handgun ban, McDonald v. City of Chicago, a lawsuit filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association, and four Chicago residents. That case could result in incorporation of the Second Amendment to the states.
The conduct of a police officer, judge, or another person clothed with governmental authority that, although it superficially appears to be within the individual’s lawful power, is actually in contravention of the law. For example, a police officer who makes a false arrest while on duty, or while off duty but when they are wearing a uniform or badge, is acting under color of law.
Meanwhile, a group of local open carry activists – open carry is legal in Washington State – are discussing a possible protest at a Seattle city park.
The Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation and its sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, have promised to sue. Other gun rights organizations will likely join that lawsuit.
Mayor Nickels is on his way out of office. His excuse that this is being done to protect children is both boilerplate and lame. Seattle residents must be wondering what is really behind this 11th hour posturing that could cost them many thousands of dollars that the city does not have to waste on frivolous political actions. The Seattle Weekly is asking both of the men seeking to succeed Nickels how they feel about the ban.
Update!!!
(Posted @ 11:08 a.m.)
The Seattle Gun Rights Examiner spoke with Sgt. Rich O’Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officer’s Guild, who observed that “This is…totally worthless,” and he recognized the questionable legality of the gun ban.
“Do you really think a criminal element is going to be deterred because someone put up a sign,” he questioned. “Rank and file officers just shake their heads at this. Law-abiding people are the only ones affected. The criminal element is going to totally ignore it.”
He said anyone who violates the regulation and is subsequently contacted by police could be taken into custody, transported to a police station, interviewed there and released. Seattle police officers do not issue citations for trespass violations, he noted, so people willfully violating the ban will be taken away.
However, he said it is important to keep this in perspective, and not escalate any confrontation into a charge of resisting arrest or something more serious. O’Neill urges everyone to keep a cool head.
“Officers,” he acknowledged, “will be very reluctant to answer such calls.”
A 30-year-veteran of the Seattle Police Department, O’Neill summed up the ban: “It’s not going to protect anyone.”
Nickels makes gun ban official and the public reacts
October 15, 9:08 AM
Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman
Outgoing Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels yesterday (Oct. 14) made it official: He announced that city park properties will be posted off limits to firearms, even those guns that are legally carried by law-abiding citizens.
Public reaction to the move has been overwhelmingly negative, much the same as it was during the public comment period that ended Oct. 4. KOMO's Ken Schram is not pleased with Nickels, either. I wrote about public reaction here, and was not surprised that Bob Scales, senior policy analyst for the city’s Office of Policy and Management, somewhat dismissed the huge negative reaction in a remark to SeattlePostGlobe.org because “65% of the comments were from outside Seattle.”
Scales, reached by the PostGlobe, noted those numbers were essentially correct. But he noted "65% of the comments were from outside Seattle. We got a lot of negative comments after the NRA posted a link to our comment page on their website."
So what? Don’t people from outside Seattle have a voice? After all, many of them may work in the city, many more may visit and will be directly affected, especially if they come to participate in, or watch, athletic events at these park facilities, or simply enjoy a day in the park.
It was disappointing to read in Kery Murakami’s PostGlobe report this morning that Scales – reacting to the figures published in this space the other day – said those numbers were essentially correct.
Not “essentially correct,” they are correct, as supplied by Bob via e-mail and confirmed in a telephone conversation. That’s like stating that “Bob and Kery are essentially nice guys…even though 65% of the people who think so are not related to them.”
It has been widely reported in this space and elsewhere that Attorney General Rob McKenna has advised Mayor Nickels that this ban would be illegal under state statute.
That brings up a serious question:
Knowing that the Attorney General has advised that this gun ban is illegal, are Seattle police officers going to enforce the ban?
This might fall under a legal term: Acting under color of law. According to a couple of websites here and here, this is a crime when it involves depriving someone of their civil rights protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. It is not clear how this shakes out legally, if police enforce a local regulation that is not even adopted in the form of an ordinance, which the Attorney General has already said is illegal.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled earlier this year that the Second Amendment applies to the states. That ruling is now “on hold” while the Ninth Circuit mulls the question once again, and while the U.S. Supreme Court waits to consider a challenge to the Chicago handgun ban, McDonald v. City of Chicago, a lawsuit filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association, and four Chicago residents. That case could result in incorporation of the Second Amendment to the states.
The conduct of a police officer, judge, or another person clothed with governmental authority that, although it superficially appears to be within the individual’s lawful power, is actually in contravention of the law. For example, a police officer who makes a false arrest while on duty, or while off duty but when they are wearing a uniform or badge, is acting under color of law.
Meanwhile, a group of local open carry activists – open carry is legal in Washington State – are discussing a possible protest at a Seattle city park.
The Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation and its sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, have promised to sue. Other gun rights organizations will likely join that lawsuit.
Mayor Nickels is on his way out of office. His excuse that this is being done to protect children is both boilerplate and lame. Seattle residents must be wondering what is really behind this 11th hour posturing that could cost them many thousands of dollars that the city does not have to waste on frivolous political actions. The Seattle Weekly is asking both of the men seeking to succeed Nickels how they feel about the ban.
Update!!!
(Posted @ 11:08 a.m.)
The Seattle Gun Rights Examiner spoke with Sgt. Rich O’Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officer’s Guild, who observed that “This is…totally worthless,” and he recognized the questionable legality of the gun ban.
“Do you really think a criminal element is going to be deterred because someone put up a sign,” he questioned. “Rank and file officers just shake their heads at this. Law-abiding people are the only ones affected. The criminal element is going to totally ignore it.”
He said anyone who violates the regulation and is subsequently contacted by police could be taken into custody, transported to a police station, interviewed there and released. Seattle police officers do not issue citations for trespass violations, he noted, so people willfully violating the ban will be taken away.
However, he said it is important to keep this in perspective, and not escalate any confrontation into a charge of resisting arrest or something more serious. O’Neill urges everyone to keep a cool head.
“Officers,” he acknowledged, “will be very reluctant to answer such calls.”
A 30-year-veteran of the Seattle Police Department, O’Neill summed up the ban: “It’s not going to protect anyone.”