In February, a new gun law is slated to go into effect in the city of Seattle. This new law will require all gun owners to lock up their firearms when they are not in use. Those who do not lock up their firearms risk a fine of up to $500.
It didn’t take long for the NRA and a local Washington gun rights group to push back against this law, filing a lawsuit against the city of Seattle. On October 19th, though, this lawsuit was dismissed by King County Superior Court Judge Barbara Linde. Linde expressed agreement with the city’s argument that the new law was “eminently reasonable” as well as their argument that the law could not yet be challenged since it hasn’t actually gone into effect.
“It is frustrating when judges refuse to address the merits of a case and duck by saying the law is not yet in effect and plaintiffs have not proven that they will be arrested if they violate the law,” said Alan Gottlieb, the president of the Bellvue, Washington-based Second Amendment Foundation who, along with the NRA, filed the lawsuit against the city of Seattle, “We will continue this litigation and force a judge to rule that the law is illegal.”
Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes, however, expressed a different view of the situation, saying, “It seems the NRA jumped the gun in filing their lawsuit against this eminently reasonable legislation meant to protect children and the vulnerable.”
Of course, Holmes’ definition of “eminently reasonable” is anything but to those who understand the Second Amendment. Forcing gun owners to lock up their firearms under fear of criminal penalty is not only a serious violation of individual rights, it also negates the primary reason why so many people choose to own firearms in the first place.
A gun that is locked up in a safe is virtually useless as a means of self-defense. A person may have time to open the safe and load their firearm in some home-invasion scenarios. In most scenarios, though, doing so will simply take too much time.
The city of Seattle is forcing gun owners to adopt a practice that will cost them minutes in situations where every second counts. They are essentially nullifying the right to self-defense in a roundabout way that violates the spirit of the Second Amendment without violating the letter of the law.
Responsible gun owners do not need the city government telling them how to secure their firearms in order to keep their children safe. Irresponsible gun owners are, by nature, not going to follow the law anyway. Like so many ill-thought-out gun control laws, Seattle’s new law will only serve to punish safe, responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the real problem.
Nevertheless, at least for now, the law will continue as scheduled, stripping the rights of Seattle citizens to adequately defend themselves in their own homes. Both the NRA and the Washington-based Second Amendment Foundation have given every indication that they will fight the law again once it actually goes into place and the judge does not have an easy cop-out for dismissing the case. We can only hope that they are successful in getting this unconstitutional law overturned.
Gun-grabbing cities such as Seattle far too often serve as proving grounds for much more large-scale laws. In fact, come November, Washington residents will have to vote on a state-wide gun security law that is even more stringent than the one that was passed in Seattle. If laws such as this are allowed to go into effect unchallenged, the gun control crowd could very well strip citizens of their Second Amendment rights without ever having to confiscate a single firearm.
If there’s any silver lining to this story beyond the fact that gun rights groups are fighting against the law as hard as they can, it’s the fact that Seattle’s law will be almost impossible to enforce. Unless the police have a search warrant to enter a Seattle home, no one is ever going to know whether or not a person is keeping their guns locked away in a safe. Still, it’s a sad day when American citizens must break the law in order to defend their families and their home.
~ American Gun News
This law isn’t as bad as it sounds for gun owners. First; IT can only be enforced if the gun owner is careless enough to leave guns unsecured when not in use and someone steels it, or a child takes it and a tragedy happens. I think 99% of us normally keep our guns secured to prevent this out habit and common sense. Second; If your PDW is loaded and where you can get it while your at home, than it’s in use and not in violation of the law. Being that the law is worded as such your not in violation as your gun is in use at the time as the law does not define what is use. The only actual time police can enter and surch your house is when executing a surch warrant issued by a Judge based on sworn testimony of a complaint from an eye whittnes or victim. No such authority of law can give a lawenforcement officer athuorty to surch your home, vechical, or person with out reasonable susspisson or warrant to enforce any law or ordnance. While there is no such thing as a good antiy gun law, this particular law only compels gun owners to do that they would do what they already normally do already. It only concerns the 1% that are careless enough to leave guns unsecured while not at home.unless there is a specific definition of what secured means, you would be abiding the law by what ever responsible way you normally secure your guns aalready. In a city with as high a crime rate like Seattle it’s not such a bad law if you stop and consider it. While I personally don’t support any gun laws that restrict ownership or carry on citizens, this law would not do either, so it’s not worth expenditure of time and money to fight it.
I have to agree with Jack, above, that this is not unreasonable…subject to the definition of “in use.” I keep a handgun on top of my safe when at home; in a GunVault (r) on the nightstand overnight. There are no children in our household. When grandchildren are over, my handgun is either on my person or in the GunVault. All the other guns–additional pistols, AR-15, 20-gauge shotgun, and bolt action rifle–are locked in a safe. Anything less is dangerous. Former sheriff of Harris County Texas, Adrian Garcia, left his service pistol on a table in his house–with no alarm system and no gun safe–just waiting for the inevitable burglar to break in and steal it. So the sheriff, with his carelessness, armed a burglar.
We read or hear in the news about a child getting his/her parent’s gun and shooting himself or someone else. This new law would, I believe, punish the parent and rightly so. Maybe the knowledge of punishment will encourage careless people to exercise care.
how is it possible to enter a wrong captcha AFTER the comment is entered?
And WHY does the comment disappear when the person has to backup to enter a “CLICK IN A BOX”?
FOR ME NECCESSARY HELP WITH REALITY MONEY BECAUSE I HAVE NEED FOR OPERAZIONE OF MY EYES. WITH MY LEFT EYE I NOT CAN SEE .THIS SITUATION STAY WITH ME BEFORE TWO YEARS . BUT I HAVE WITHOUT WORK AND FOR THIS MOMENT NI ONE PERSON OR FIRMS HELPING OF ME!!WITH RESPECTFULL-TATYANA MIRCHEVA
While these gun-grabbers may feel their aims are helpful, say for ‘safety’s’ sake’, I cannot help but recall the unfortunate results of unintended consequences. Instances include the European and Asian practice of requiring the registration of guns. IN the Netherlands, at the onset of WW2, this was the practice. Gun owners were able to keep their firearms, but had to register them. Lists were kept at police stations. When the Nazis invaded Holland, they merely went to these same police stations and obtained the lists. They then went to the locations and DEMANDED the arms. Those who refused were killed. The Nazis also punished the people by stripping food from stores, and many people suffered, unable now to resist. This same gun-registry mentality has had similar effects on other countries, Germany, Italy, China, etc. Notice these same countries also had ego-maniacal despots who were able to use these ‘registration lists’ to the subjugation of their respective peoples. So long as a listing exists of gun possessors, the danger also exists some dictator or similar unlawful government WILL use them to control potential rebellious means of revolt. For this reason, had I EVER owned a gun, I would NOT register it. Nor would I admit or deny ownership, either!
I think that there be a demonstration to show all how long it would take to unlock, then look for the ammunition, then look for the magazine, then load the magazine with the proper ammunition then inserting the magazine, then pulling the slide back loading one round and pointing the weapon at the invader. Ooops!!! You forgot the safety lock, now you have to go and search for the keys. But it’s too late now,because the home invaders have come in either killed you and your family while you were looking for everything and possibly violating your wife and daughter/s .
Home invaders don’t care about you and your family just the terror of the attacks and how much much they can get!!!
How about impeachment of judges.
How many people are killed by cars ? Will they be banned as guns are in some States or Cities like Seattle ?
I lived in CA when they did their “assault weapons” ban. Gun collectors & sportsmen, etc. simply ignored this tyranny. We got, kept and used what we wanted in-spite of this fascist overreach. Same thing is going on right now in Seattle.
Doctors who prescribe pharmaceutical drugs kill more people then Guns in the United States every year.
Yet Doctors are never charged with their crimes. If Seattle wants to reduce crime then need to establish both concealed and open carry policies. The FBI knows it, I know it and most Gun Owners know it. If you want to prevent a child from accidentally shooting someone, teach him how it works and teach him how to respect it. The only stupid child is a child who hasn’t been taught. If you have a swimming pool in your yard, you teach your child how to swim. If you have a gun in your house you teach your child how to use and respect it.