McGinn Mallahan (WA State)

[LWYM425]

The article below mentions Nickles' ban may get caught up in court. I didn't know it was that close to being law. Has anyone been doing a better job of following this than I have? How close are we to this ban or one like it.

This is a slanted article, sorry. not enough time to research more ... i just did a quick google search for something on the issue:

http://www.seattlepostglobe.org/2009/10/16/mcginn-draws-distinction-with-mallahan-over-parks-gun-ban

Normally anonymous comments are ignorant, but I agreed with this guy (following his response he included articles where attackers might have been thwarted by a gun toting citizen):

> Why do you need a gun at a park?

You can't imagine the possibility of a rapist or mugger lurking in the bushes waiting for a woman of small stature or an elderly couple to walk by?

 

[brandnew]

It's not law, it's a "ban", and is illegal for them to post the signs or enforce it. The "ban" violates WA state preemption outlined in the RCW. The City of Seattle is being sued as we speak by the NRA, Second Ammendment Foundation and others including private citizens. A

What this means for you? Until it the City is successfully sued and the signs are taken down, if somebody sees you open carrying and calls the cops and the cops actually decide to show up and ask you to leave, they can only arrest you if you refuse and you'd be cited for trespass. And my understanding is that Seattle Police know the ban is illegal, and are very hesitant to enforce it because they know they'll get sued for enforcing an illegal ban.

Between printing the signs, paying police to enforce it, defending the city in court, and paying damages (expected outcome), I'm sure this will cost the city a truckload of money, which is in my opinion criminally reckless decision by Nichols, especially considering the times we're in.

If you're interested in local conversation regarding this, I highly suggest you check in on OpenCarry.org's Washington forum. The forum itself is located here:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/

And the thread regarding the ban is located here:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/32814.html

 

[brandnew]

It's also possible Nichols could be prosecuted via this WA state law...

RCW 9A.80.010 Official misconduct

(1) A public servant is guilty of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to deprive another person of a lawful right or privilege:

(a) He intentionally commits an unauthorized act under color of law; or

(b) He intentionally refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law.

(2) Official misconduct is a gross misdemeanor.

But I'm about doubtful that any DA would put their career on the line for that one.

 

[dkk73]

That article is hard to parse. Jeez. Maybe it's their web software.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like Mallahan is not that hot to pursue Nichols' ban. In several instances, he is quoted as saying he supports Nichols' goal of 'reducing violence' but questions this approach.

That is probably as close as any Seattle politician can get to saying 'leave legal guns alone' and not get run out of town. It almost sounds sane if you squint a little.

There are so many other projects to reduce gang violence, crack down on gang activity, do community-specific projects. I don't think there's much appetite for devoting city and police admin resources to this. I also suspect that sympathy for CCW folks is increasing with the uptick in crime in the crummier parts of the city since latter 2008. I moved out, so I'm not as closely involved as before.

Anyhow, we shall see. Sounds like McGinn is fairly happy to beat the big-L liberal drum of 'guns are bad'.