The Seattle PI had an opinion piece where they said:
Mayor Greg Nickels’ plan to forbid guns on a host of city properties is a measured response to the gunshot injuries to two people at Seattle Center during the Folklife celebration.
…
The city would ask people legally carrying concealed weapons not to bring the guns into city parks, community centers and other city facilities. Anyone discovered with a gun could be asked to leave under trespassing statutes.
…
He represents his city well on the issue.
I responded in the comments with:
Posted by Joe Huffman at 6/9/08 10:30 p.m.
I have Just One Question for the editorial board and the mayor:
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?
This yielded a response of:
unkanny at 6/10/08 12:24 p.m.
Airports, airplanes. Divorce court. You’re welcome.
My response:
Posted by Joe Huffman at 6/10/08 4:05 p.m.
unkanny said,
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?Airports, airplanes. Divorce court. You’re welcome.
Do you have any data to support your claims?
I can and do leagally carry a concealed weapons at most aiports. So you are ignorant if you believe there are restrictions in most areas of most U.S. airports.
Your claim in the case for airplanes is refuted by just one example: The planes hijacked on 9/11/2001 had weapons restrictions enforced which made it extremely difficult for the victims to fight back.
As for divorce courts supply us the safety data number before and after weapons restrictions were implemented and then we can discuss it.
I don’t expect a response but we’ll see…
Update: No response to my reply but I added this comment to the thread:
Once Mayor Nickels has established a precedent of discriminating against constitutionally protected individuals carrying firearms perhaps he will expand the list of undesirables to Jews, homosexuals, and people involved in mixed race marriages.
Bigotry is an ugly thing. Don’t let Nickels and the PI editorial board get away with it.
I don’t see how this order can stand given RCW 9.41.290:
and RCW 9.41.300:
(emphasis is mine)
They are obviously trying to get around state preemption by using tresspassing laws, but…
Concerning defence against tresspassing charges, RCW 9A.52.090 states:
I don’t see how some one can be tresspassing on public property at a time an place where the public is allowed and no crime has been comitted; or is it just me?
Looks by time on your comment you and I discovered that article about the same time. I blew a gasket when I read it and just fired it off to friends and family. I do my best to not become infuriated with the drivel but sometime I just cant believe that so many people are so damn gullible. I’d swear I could tell them that the word gullible had been removed from the dictionary and they’d actually believe me.
Best part of the whole thing though was he thought his fact less reply was good enough, what made me laugh was the way you took it and slapped him with it and said, “Next contestant please.”
Thanks for the second reminder I’m not alone in my thoughts.
-Barron
Jason, they can’t get away with it. But it’s expensive and time consuming for people to fight it.
But it’s expensive and time consuming for people to fight it.
Exactly.