Like the Claude Rains character in Casablanca, it is shocking, SHOCKING!, that such a galvanizing issue as the lawsuit against Mayor Greg Nickels and the City of Seattle should bring out the public fangs, but read the feedback pages in the on-line Seattle Post-Intelligencer or Seattle Times websites, or the West Seattle Blog.
Wear rubber-soled shoes and don’t stand in water when you click on those sites. There are more than 275 comments on the Times reader feedback site, and a rather pitiful – by comparison – 67 comments at the P-I site.
NRA, I didnt elect you. Get the H out of my city. Same for all you stupid WA yokel losers. Go stick to your dumpy towns. The engine called Seattle that pays all your bills gets to make its own decisions. I thought you guys were all about local rights. But I know, your only true love, your gun, is crying out - "help, me daddy, help me, the liberals want to put me away, but I need to shoot...help me, yokel-daddy"
But they are worth reading if one wants to get an idea of just how polarized people can become on this issue.
Less disturbing but perhaps as enlightening in terms of defining the problem that exists within the firearms community, is a debate among a segment of the Open Carry activists who want to argue over wording of the complaint filed by attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation, National Rifle Association, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Washington Arms Collectors and five Seattle-area individuals. There’s an interesting thread devoted to this at the OpenCarry.org forum.
I don't care for this mayor at all, but I trust the judgment of the vast majority of second amendment nut jobs even less. Go ahead and wrap yourselves tightly in your "rights", the rest of us will use our brains, our cell phones, the police, and maybe some pepper spray without screwing everything up in pursuit of some sort of fantasy of dropping the bad guys.
The West Seattle Blog is also rife with comment, though not as many as have been garnered by the newspapers, but certainly as interesting.
There does not appear to be much “middle ground” in this debate, and sentiment appears strongly tilted against the mayor. Defenders of the ban are certainly a devoted bunch, even though State Attorney General Rob McKenna has stated unequivocally that it is illegal under state statute, which I discussed here and here.
Guns are illegal at schools and universities so why not a park?Hey, Big man with a gun in your hand, do you feel strong?
The city is going to be represented pro bono by an international law firm that, according to CBSNews.com correspondent Declan McCullagh, has something of a history of supporting anti-gun activities. That should make for some interesting back-and-forth between attorneys.
The question remains, of course, as to why Nickels is such a fanatic about this when he’s been turned out of office. What’s he trying to do? Is he sprucing up his image as a fanatical gun prohibitionist for a job with the Obama administration or Mayors Against Illegal Guns, as some have suggested?
Simply arguing that this is to protect children doesn’t wash.
Visit with other Gun Rights Examiners:
And Don’t forget to visit:
Comments
We know we are standing on legal ground and will win this. The anti's can and will always scream out of fear and ignorance. That is because they refuse to see the truth.
It was interesting to hear person in the above article cry about local control when as I understand the issue the mayor never gave the local population the right to vote on the issue. The mayor just mandated it. When the majority of the citizens vote on the issue and vote guns out of the parks then it should be considered valid as mandated by the citzens and not the mayor and a handful of questionable citzens who seem toi have his attention.
robert
The citizens of Seattle DID vote. They voted the architect of this "rule" out of office. The people of Seattle have already spoken on this matter. At the ballot box, in on-line polls and in community meetings, time and time again the majority have said they don't want this ban. The liberal leadership of Seattle apparently believe they know whats best for the people they are suppose to be serving. It likens itself to how a parent might treat an unruly 3 year old child. Apparently Nickels didn't get the memo that the tax payers own pubic lands, not the tax spenders, and the tax payers are not 3 year olds to be patted on the head, and the government isn't our daddy.
I wouldn't worry about people second guessing the lawsuit. I've found it to be absolutely amazing how many people on that forum think they know better than the lawyers handling whatever case is under discussion.
I guess they stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
To those whose lives have been hurt by a criminal’s use of a gun,
First, let me extend my deepest condolences to you. Losing a loved one is never easy, and a sudden loss due to violence makes it even worse. Nor is it easy to deal with the trauma associated with being shot. Although there is little I can say to offer you comfort, please know that you have the sympathy and empathy of many people, including gun owners such as myself.
After the initial shock has passed, many people who are affected by violence have the urge to “do something” so that it doesn’t happen again. I would urge you to carefully consider whether you have the right target for your activism, since the gun rights of law abiding and responsible citizens are not your enemy. Indeed we law abiding gun owners actually stop crime every day, and guns in the hands of responsible and law abiding citizens helps keep everyone safer. Efforts to ban guns leaves the law abiding people (who we would want to have guns) defensel
Just another example of leaders in this country who believe the people need to be protected from them selves. Because u know if you live in town with a population of less than million people you is a stupid hick and don't deserve a vote. Cuase we gots to let all the smart people tell us what to think. I know I am so glad we gots all them college edmucated people to help me make good desicisions cuase all I create is 80% of all the wealth in this country so i can not be worth nothing. I will just kling to my god and guns and freedom and ya can take the change.
What the anti-gun people seem to be missing is that what the mayor did is against state law! He doesn't have a legal leg to stand on. That to me is as upsetting as the ban itself. He cannot possibly win this and Seattle taxpayers get to foot the bill. That is why the state legislature decided that they would be the ones to mandate gun laws so that every little Tom, Dick, and Harry couldn't make their own laws. If Nickels were to win, what possible purpose would any of our state laws serve? He certainly has guts to ignore the state AG even after the voters have turned him out of office. Or maybe it's just plain stupidity. Well, Seattlites, you have another opportunity come Tuesday, to make your wishes known. McGinn is for the ban, and I think his name his name is Mallahan is against the ban. (Sorry, I know where the candidates stand, just can't recall the name.) I don't live in Seattle, so I don't get to help decide this one, but if I did, I know who I would vote for.
Illegal is illegal oh wait i forgot except when the anti-gun liberal progressives do it then it is ok. How stupid of me to think that they would stand on legal issues even when they say they are for the rights of the people.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!