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.