McKenna Challenges Nickels on Gun-Free Zone Policy

city%20hall%20grundlepuck.jpg
Beautiful photo of City Hall, by Seattlest Flickr Pool Contributor Grundlepuck.

Two weeks after a gunman at Folklife injured three people, Mayor Greg Nickels announced his plan to ban guns from all city-owned property. Yesterday, Wash. State Attorney General Rob McKenna (defending his office against challenger John Ladenburg in November's election) released an official legal opinion concluding that Nickels does not have the authority to order the prohibition.

The somewhat toothless policy drew fire from critics when it was announced, and the Mayor himself predicted he would see some opposition from the state. He delayed the ban in the face of logistical challenges for Bumbershoot, and at that point McKenna was asked to formulate a legal opinion on the proposed ban. This week's statement from the Attorney General is the culmination of a month's work of intensive research on the subject, including analysis of a case in Sequim that the Mayor's Office touted as court-worthy legal precedent.

Though McKenna's opinion can't stop the Mayor's executive order to prohibit guns on public property from taking effect, it will help the prosecution in the court case(s) against the ban.

We've been paying an increasing amount of attention to November's Attorney General candidates, incumbent Rob McKenna and challenger John Ladenburg; in our continued struggle to decide which candidate to support, this clear-headed analysis from McKenna is reassuring. That gun ban has seemed fishy and wrong-headed from the start. Yes, the gunshots at Folklife were scary, but to try to override the state's laws regarding concealed weapons permits just seems headed towards trouble. We'd rather see Nickels & Co. lobbying to make concealed weapons permits tougher to obtain.

Thoughts? Do you think Nickels' ban will stand up in court? Would you support the ban if it were in the hands of the voters?

Email This Entry


Comments (5) [rss]

Where's some information on Longacresfield?

user-pic

My opinion in brief: Nickel's ban will not (and ought not) to stand up in court. This is a state issue and should not be left to the reactive whims of the mayor, nor the voters.

Additionally, does anyone in their right mind actually believe that a gun ban would do anything to deter the type of person who would open fire in a public place?

All this plan is doing instead of actually enforcing laws in public places and making the public feel safe in our parks, hes just asking criminals to be less criminalistic. Its cheaper!

No matter how you feel about private citizens carrying firearms, there's nothing to like about Nickels' plan. If we allow Nickels to ignore state law governing firearms, what basis will we have to object when some mayor in eastern Washington decides he's going to ignore state law concerning domestic partnerships? Kudos to McKenna for hauling Nickels up short.

Post a comment (Comment Policy)

Tips

About Seattlest

Seattlest is a website about Seattle. More

Editor: Regis Lacher Publisher: Gothamist

Contribute

Latest Tip:

John Stossel has a blurb about the Dance Steps fiasco. Stossel on Dance Steps
[more]

Latest Photo:

Recent Comments

Subscribe

Use an RSS reader to stay up to date with the latest news and posts from Seattlest.

All Our RSS