This will be the shortest lived judicial decision on 2A ever

This is a discussion on This will be the shortest lived judicial decision on 2A ever within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Judge Says Seattle Gun Ban Constitutional - News Story - KIRO Seattle Judge Says Seattle Gun Ban Constitutional Posted: 12:13 pm PST March 12,2010 SEATTLE ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: This will be the shortest lived judicial decision on 2A ever

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,122

    This will be the shortest lived judicial decision on 2A ever

    Judge Says Seattle Gun Ban Constitutional - News Story - KIRO Seattle
    Judge Says Seattle Gun Ban Constitutional
    Posted: 12:13 pm PST March 12,2010

    SEATTLE -- A federal judge has ruled that Seattle's ban on firearms in city parks and community centers is constitutional.
    U.S. District Court Judge Marsha Pechman ruled Thursday that the city of Seattle was within its rights to enact the gun ban.
    Pechman says the Second Amendment constrains the actions of Congress, not cities and states.
    Pechman's decision follows a King County Superior Court ruling last week that came to the opposite conclusion, saying the city rule cannot be enforced.
    A Kent man challenged the city's firearms ban by carrying a weapon into the Southwest Community Center last year. He was asked to leave. There are no criminal or other penalties under the city's gun ban.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Distinguished Member Array BigStick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gig Harbor, WA
    Posts
    1,455
    The rediculous thing is that there was no reason for a Federal judge to rule on this. The reason the ban was struck down was because Washington's State constitution restrics localities from enacting any restrictions more stringent than the sate laws. That is why Seattle couldn't ban them. It had nothing to do with the 2A.

    I want to know which federal judge felt the need to stick their nose in where it doesn't belong and make a rediculous political statement. Right as the Supreme court is about to rule on this very subject again.
    Walk softly ...

  4. #3
    Member Array CenterOfMass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    140
    This US District Judge is supporting the same argument and logic King Richard Daley is using in placing a virtual gun ban on all Chicago citizens....the left is never going to give up, regardless of what the US Supreme Court decides in the McDonald case. They DO NOT WANT American citizens armed, PERIOD!

    Stay vigilant!
    EDC - S&W M&P .45

    "The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take." Thomas Jefferson

    http://www.gunrightsreport.com

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588
    Did this case go before her in her courtroom or did she just stick her nose into it all? From state court to federal court??
    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array tbrenke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,006
    eather way it will not stand.

    RCW 9.41.290
    State preemption.

    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.
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
    There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.

  7. #6
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,222
    Did this case go before her in her courtroom or did she just stick her nose into it all? From state court to federal court??
    Somebody took it to her federal court. She can't just claim jurisdiction.......

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock and Glock View Post
    Somebody took it to her federal court. She can't just claim jurisdiction.......
    That was my point.
    The article only mentioned that her dicision followed a King County Superiour Court ruling that was made only the previous week. One week is awfully quick for it to be docked and heard in federal court, isn't it?

    Anyway, it appears she overstepped her jurisdiction.

    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,636
    Many States have in their Constitutions, that an "individual" has the right to bear arms. In those states, that clarifies the "right' aspect of it.

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array press1280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    750
    But the WA supreme court ruled the 2A IS incorporated in that state. Now a Federal Judge wants to un-incorporate it? This is wierd.
    "The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
    Nunn v. State GA 1848

  11. #10
    Member Array Bandolero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    267
    Reading the relevant statutes, there does not appear to be any basis for her decision except personal bias.

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Just because she a judge doesn't make her the sharpest cheese on the cracker. She must need attention for some political ambition in her future.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  13. #12
    Member Array user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Va. & Middle of Nowhere, W.Va.
    Posts
    386
    Not sure whether a USDC could have acquired jurisdiction over that case; but if so, it's competent to rule on the Second Amendment issue. That has absolutely nothing to do with the state law claims.

    It is axiomatic that where a judicial opinion exceeds the power of the court to act, for example for lack of either personal or subject-matter jurisdiction, that court's order is void. Not just subject to attack, but just as if it had never happened.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  14. #13
    Member Array BurgDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    130
    Making it a 2nd amendment issue made it a federal court issue. Fed court said 2nd amendment is not incorporated and that is a true statement until SCOTUS rules on McDonald vs Chicago.

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,020
    the city of Seattle was within its rights to enact the gun ban.
    Oh really? With a state preemption law in force, and the constitutional clause that Washington has?

    Washington State Constitution

    SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.
    The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
    Again, what possible flaw or problem can anyone have with that language? It's clear as sunshine, even to dull "cheese on crackers."

    Sure, such limitations are ruled Constitutional. They're not, but then judges have been in the back pockets of the enemies of the People for decades.

    Seems pretty clear that the issue is Washington State's legislation on preemption, RCW 9.41.290. The preemption law disallows local ordinances from applying in areas related to firearms/ammo/usage. So, even if a certain ordinance were potentially Constitutional or not, such a local ordinance is immediately null and void in Washington State, anyway.

    RCW 9.41.290 State preemption.

    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. [1994 sp.s. c 7 428; 1985 c 428 1; 1983 c 232 12.]

    My question: If not using the existing Washington State Constitution and legislation, what possible standard of judgment is a sitting judge using, if none of that means anything??
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array raevan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    4,849
    The preemtion case and the rights case were two different court cases.
    The preemtion case came because of the mayor passing a city ordinance that was in violation of the state law. The other case came because a private citizen sued the city claiming that the law violated his second ammendment right. They were two complete different cases and each were determined by what laws are in effect at this time. The News media is just trying to cloud the issue.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. The shortest hold-up ever ?
    By ppkheat in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 23rd, 2010, 06:51 AM
  2. WTH is wrong with our judicial sytem?!!!
    By luvmy40 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2009, 06:55 PM
  3. Mass. Liberal Judicial System, Where's The Justice
    By sigbear in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: January 24th, 2009, 08:38 PM
  4. Forgot where I lived today...
    By pcon in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2009, 02:18 PM
  5. He Lived Through This! Ancient Illust
    By QKShooter in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: December 26th, 2006, 05:19 PM

Search tags for this page

shortest lived amendment

,

shortest us judicial decision

,

shortist judge ruling

,

u.s. district court judge marsha pechman gun ban ruling

Click on a term to search for related topics.