this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
122 points (98.4% liked)

Seattle

1606 readers
2 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'd like to take, "Laws that will be overturned by Bruen v. NYSPRA precedent" for $100, Alex.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (3 children)

SCOTUS would need to create new precedent, this isn't a carry ban it's a location ban.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

But current SCOTUS will gladly use this as an excuse to establish that precedent.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Its true scotus doesn't want guns in their presence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (5 children)

It's a pretty short series of hops from Heller v. D.C. to McDonald v. Chicago to Bruen v. NYSPRA to this. If you're banning carrying at almost every place, public and private, then it's a de facto ban.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago

public buildings, parks, fairgrounds and playgrounds where “children are likely to be present."

That all seems like a pretty good idea to me.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago (6 children)

If approved, the state would prohibit possession at public buildings, parks, fairgrounds and playgrounds where “children are likely to be present.”

State law already prohibits possession in restricted access areas of airports, jails, law enforcement and public health facilities, courtrooms and other related areas, bars and places off-limits to minors.

Something's not adding up, here.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago

Authoritarianism goes brrr

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

What? Bars, taverns, wineries, etc are all 21+.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Everybody is so caught up on the idea that banning guns at schools is ineffective. You see, clearly, you have to allow the guns, but ban the kids.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Isn't that Trump's plan with the Dept of Education?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

No, his plan there is to just ban the schools. Galaxy-brain, right there.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

Republicans: fetuses are babies! The word "gay" corrupts a child! Won't anyone think of the Children??

Also republicans: were not paying for kids lunches, fuck those kids. Kids have school shooting problems? Then get a bullet proof blanket you whiny bitch! Guns are not allowed where we adults have fun, or work, but around kids? All fine, shut your whining!

Such a nice group of caring people

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Such an obviously good idea.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

So good of an idea that the stupid 30% of this country will hate it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (20 children)

I don’t live in Seattle. I’d like to ask a local, if one is reading, how they feel about this.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (19 children)

We already do not allow concealed carry in many places. I think it makes sense to not allow them in parks, public buildings, etc.

This coming from a firearm owner who has had a concealed carry permit in the past.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (21 children)

I think it makes sense to not allow them in parks, public buildings, etc.

If they are somehow immune from violent perpetrators, I would agree. For example, if the "public building" has armed security.

Otherwise, we're just creating unarmed victim zones.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

From my perspective, it’s zones that are free of hammers looking for nails.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›