This week the Seattle mayor signed an executive order banning "dangerous weapons" on all City-owned property. Only exception being "guns issued to law enforcement personnel".
This was his reaction to a recent incident at the Folklife festival where a firearm carried by a CCW permit holder was discharged in an accidental / non-justifiable shooting. Out of all of the people in the US who LEGALLY own and carry a firearm, how often does this happen? Until someone proves otherwise, I will state that this is a very isolated incident statistically. Heart disease and cancer combine for more than a million American deaths per year.
Instead of a practical solution (your suggestion here).......the mayor presents a knee-jerk reaction that tramples rights of law-abiding citizens. This isn't just banning "dangerous weapons" from music festivals, the steps of the Seattle Public Library, or city-owned parks..........it is ALL city-owned property. I searched but could not find a map showing every nook and cranny of Seattle that is city-owned. This ban also includes CCW permit holders.
Even if you don't believe citizens should be allowed to carry firearms, surely the manner in which the mayor went about this would slightly make you mad. Remember how pissed everyone gets over Bush's executive orders that overstep all the checks and balances of our political system? Same manner. The mayor completely overstepped his bounds by not allowing this to go to ballot so those who live within the city limits could vote (have their say)...nor did he allow the city council (elected representatives of said people within city limits) have their say. He just made an executive order and gave all his departments 30 days to figure out how to enforce his idea.
He tried to make it sound justifiable by stating in his executive order that city ordinances relating to firearms "are consistent with state law". Which is complete bullshit. A CCW permit holder can legally carry on property owned by the state......but no longer on property owned by the city. How is that "consistent"?
An executive order is for emergency use only....not unlimited use....as it gets a free pass over any approval by anyone else. But does any politician follow that rule?