According to a piece in the Everett Herald recently re-elected council member, John "Freedom County" Koster, doesn't think there are enough venues for gun owners in Snohomish County and is hoping to repeal the county's current ban on firearms in the county's parks. Herald reporter Noah Haglund writes,
"If a new law passes, you could feel free to tote a legally owned firearm into county parks. Just don’t shoot it, unless it’s in self-defense.
County code, as it reads now, prohibits people from carrying or discharging guns in county parks.
Lifting the long-standing ban is mostly a house-keeping measure to bring the county in line with state law, said Councilman John Koster, who submitted the proposal earlier this month. An opinion from State Attorney General Rob McKenna supports his stance.
“You read through the attorney general’s opinion, it’s pretty darn strong,” Koster said. “The code is in conflict with state law.”
Crossbows, slingshots and fireworks would still be against the rules if the law changes in Snohomish County."
Republican Councilman John Koster; Proposed repeal would welcome guns into county parks (Photo, Koster campaign website)
The state law in question is RCW 9.41.290, "State Preemption" and reads:
"The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality."
Koster's actions come as the city of Seattle prepares to defend its recently passed ordinance banning firearms in city parks and other public venues; a case that will most likely end up in the State Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of the state's right to supersede a municipal or county government's right to determine its own public safety laws. The Seattle ordinance was passed in October and was immediately challenged by the pro-gun lobbying groups, Second Amendment Foundation and the NRA. Seattle Gun Rights Examiner, David Workman has been writing extensively on the Seattle gun ban and is quoted in the Herald article,
"That statute has been on the books since 1983 and was strengthened in 1985, said Dave Workman, Bellevue-based senior editor for the national newspaper “Gun Week.” The state law made any local gun bans unenforceable, he said.
“The Second Amendment Foundation would not have taken this to court,” said Workman, “if they weren’t absolutely sure that this statute (in Seattle) was illegal under the state preemption statute.”
He called the Seattle law “all flash and no substance” and said Koster’s move was “really the smart thing to do.”"
Koster's motion is sure to run into resistance from at least two of his fellow council members. In email exchanges with council members Dave Somers and Brian Sullivan both men expressed concerns about repealing the ban and said they believe it would be more prudent to wait for the outcome of the Seattle case before moving forward in Snohomish County. Sullivan wrote:
"First and foremost I oppose guns in public parks that are used by family and children. I cannot support Council member Koster's proposal. Although I come from a gun family I have never acclimated to them in fact I deplore them, I do understand the culture and believe like many issues that Republicans and Democrats disagree on this may never be resolved. I will continue to support this ban and as you suggested will watch with interest the Seattle case."
Council members Brian Sullivan (Dist. 2) and Dave Somers (Dist. 5) oppose gun ban repeal (Photos: Snohomish County Administration)
Koster, a champion to the conservative right, lead the failed effort in the state legislature in 1997 to create "Freedom County" by carving off the area of Snohomish County that he currently represents. He is planning to bring the repeal effort to the full council in the next couple of weeks. Final action would require a period for public comment.
Peace,
Chad Shue
Comments
There is no ban to repeal you fool.
I live there and carry in the parks whenever it suits me.
The silly "ban" isn't legal...got it? Jeez
Tj
So you think that Koster is on a fool's errand?
Peace,
Chad Shue
Is it a fool's errand to make the public aware of such unenforceable rules?
The biggest reason that ANY gun-ban has ever passed, was the lack of education by the public about the logical result of such silly, unconstitutional laws: The forced disarmament of potential victims.
I live in Vancouver, and as good as the Clark County Sheriff's office is, they are few and far between: I desire that my wife, son, and daughters have the competence and means to protect themselves IF necessary, whether at home or at "the Mall".
"How is it that a woman, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is morally superior to the woman who must explain to the police how that man got bullet holes in him?"
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Do-Gooder!
Mike,
I wrote a piece that says John Koster wants to repeal a code that bans guns in parks. Tj writes to tell us that there is no ban to repeal (apparently inder the impression that the state RCW effectively repealed the county code) and calls someone a fool. As Koster is the one who is actually suggesting the repeal of the ban, I am left to assume that Tj is referring to Koster as the fool.
So are you suggesting that, by moving forward with an unneccessary repeal effort, Koster is actually just "making the public aware" and, therefore is not a fool?
Peace,
Chad Shue
Chad, you got it wrong from the start: "Proposed code repeal would allow loaded guns in Snohomish County parks." The right to carry guns is a right guaranteed by the supreme law of the land,the U.S. Constitution AND state law, as you acknowledge. Local laws that try to restrict state and constitutional laws are themselves unlawful and therefor unenforceable. Therefor repealing the unlawful restriction cannot and does not "allow" loaded guns in Snohomish County parks. Even the existing state and federal laws don't "allow" firearms to be carried in the parks.They themselves "guarantee" that carrying firearms is is a right, not a privilege "allowed" by any other law or person. Am I missing something? Why don't you "get" this?
Why wouldn't Sullivan "oppose guns in public parks that are used by family and children." because as he says:"...I come from a gun family(no explanation of exactly what a "gun family" is) {but}I have never acclimated to them in fact I DEPLORE them...".--- So he bases his decision on nothing more than an irrational fear and hatred for guns. This syndrome (sickness) is called a "phobia", namely, "hoplophobia". This makes perfect sense to me. Why don't we insist that ALL lawmakers base their legislative decisions on their neuroses instead of a knowledge of and respect for the supreme law of the land? As Mr. Lee said,"Something wrong here." And Barry Scheck added,"Yes, ladies and gentlemen, something was terribly wrong!"
Johnny Law,
While I think I understand your point about "allowing someone to excercise a right" the simple fact is that when you lift a ban on someone excercising their right you are by default now allowing them to excercise that right.
Out of curiousity, do you respect the ban on carrying a gun on to school grounds or do you believe that it is ok to prohibit or restrict the 2nd amendment guarantee at the schoolhouse door?
Peace,
Chad Shue
Chad,
The Snohomish ban, just like the Seattle ban, is unenforceable because it is in conflict with state pre-emption. If the Snohomish County prosecutor's office attempted to try someone who was carrying in a park, they'd very possibly end up costing the taxpayers a lot of money in legal fees.
Unenforceable laws should be repealed.
Guns are allowed in all state, county and municipal parks in Washington state. Period, end of discussion. Doesn't matter that a city or county refuses to alter it's laws to comply with state law.
Starting in February, we'll be able to carry in National Parks in Washington as well. That should give you an aneurism.
Ken,
I supppose the state Supreme Court will tell us if the state's "Pre-emption" law is constitutional. Many local and regional law enforcement folks (as well as governing bodies) believe that it is not. I have doubts myself as it seeks to impose the state's will over local governance. Time and the courts will tell.
As for the "Guns in Nat'l Parks" thing; I already wrote about that and you can read my thoughts on the matter by clicking on the link at the bottom of this piece.
Peace,
Chad Shue
Chad,
The State Supreme Court has already ruled on RCW 9.41.290 (firearms law pre-emption), twice. The State Constitution, Article 11 Section 11, allows the state legislature to pre-empt danged near anything.
totally back the effort to repeal the concealed weapons ban, by licensed Concealed carry persons, in County Parks. There is no difference in being in the park than being in the general public environment. The anti Second Amendment and anti gun people and organizations are, and continue to be, paranoid over firearms in any way or form. I revert back to the all true statement that “guns don’t kill, people do”.
@Stan
People may kill people but they do it so much more efficiently with a gun.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
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!