Seattle Gun Safe/Stolen Gun Law

Status
Not open for further replies.

Evergreen

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
566
Location
Fort Mill, SC
Frank Ettin said:
No one has bothered to post any actual, proposed text of the law, so we’re done here.
Well, I have yet to find any resources on Seattle City Government website, but I consider the Seattle Times the next best thing. The Seattle Times is more or less the unofficial voice coming from Seattle City Hall.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...-seeks-law-to-require-owners-to-lock-up-guns/

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan and Councilmember M. Lorena González said Wednesday that they plan to propose legislation to require gun owners to lock up firearms left in their homes and vehicles.

The legislation also could increase penalties for people who fail to report lost and stolen guns, they said, describing the move as a response to a widespread gun-violence crisis and to shootings in Seattle.

They said they plan to work out the details over the coming months in consultation with gun owners, safety advocates, public-health experts and others.

González noted she grew up in a rural Washington home where her father kept his guns locked and said she expects the legislation to reduce accidental shootings and gun suicides among children.

State law prohibits Washington cities from regulating guns, and Durkan said she expects the legislation would be challenged in court.

The mayor said she’s confident the city would prevail because the legislation wouldn’t stop anyone from buying, carrying or transporting a gun.

“This is not an anti-gun measure. This is a gun-safety measure,” Durkan said.

Some cities outside Washington, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles, have laws that require gun storage.
 
Well, I have yet to find any resources on Seattle City Government website, but I consider the Seattle Times the next best thing. ...

I don't, and in fact it's not.

In order to intelligently discuss a law, we must know exactly what the law says. The exact language is important. The only way to know that is to read the law itself (and sometimes review case law to help clarify meaning and application).

So a useful discussion of a law requires a primary source, i. e., the law. Secondary sources are inadequate for the purpose.

Indeed it appears that the law hasn't even been written yet. Until it is, and we have the text, there's nothing to discuss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top