...
I talked with Edi Birk and asked her to update and upgrade the information on the website regarding weapons to include the lock box reference and procedures.
...
Ok, I had a conversation with Key Arena in March of this year. Their web site contradicts this email but it is fair to say they have no ambition to update the site. I removed the personnel email addresses and names to protect the innocent.
From: Burke, Edie (SC) [mailto:Edie.BurkeSC@seattle.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 12:09 PM
To: CCCC@XXXX; CCCC@CCCC
Cc: Customer Service Desk, Seattle Center; Zhang, Chris; Blanks, Cynthia; Bryant, Barbara
Subject:
<NAME> and <NAME> –
Recently, both of you have contacted Seattle Center about our Firearms Policy. I want to explain what we do at KeyArena events so there is no confusion. We ASK that ALL persons carrying concealed weapons check in at our entry doors with a staff member. The staff member contacts SPD Sgt. in the facility to speak with you. At that time, we offer a gun safe that you can leave your weapon in while you attend the event. The safe is in our security office, a security officer is always present, and, you have the only key to the safe. You can retrieve your weapon before you leave.
OR, if that is not what you would like to do, we ASK that you provide the SPD Sgt. with your seat location so he is aware of the location of a weapon in the seating area.
Of course, we would prefer that you leave your weapon at home if you could graciously agree to do so. However, if that is not an option, the above procedures and participation on your part is appreciated.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks, Edie
Edie E. Burke
Facility Manager
KeyArena at Seattle Center
305 Harrison Street
Seattle, WA 98109
(206) 684.7208 (office)
edie.burkesc@seattle.gov
I think that their policy is fine. They ASK you to either check the weapon or, in the alternative, they ASK you to notify the SPD Sgt. of "your seat location so he is aware of the location of a weapon in the seating area." If you disagree with their policy, the way I read it, you have the legal right to decline their request and not say anything. Personally, I never talk to cops (unless I'm cross-examining them) other than to ask them if I'm free to go. Why would you want to be the designated felon?
If it's a REQUEST (not a requirement) it should be stated as so. Both the website and the frequent announcements while we were waiting in line specifically said firearms were PROHIBITED, not "we ask..."
I agree that it should be stated as such on the signs (or not addressed, at all). That said, the response letter states that it is a request, only. Preemption knocks it out as a lawful mandate. Treat it like a Chan case and send the Seattle City Attorney a letter asking that the city comply with the law. Until they're called out on the issue, they will likely attempt to keep pushing it as a requirement.
IS it a preemption issue? I thot that since they were leasing the premises, they can legally get away with it (or at least the lessee can).
That is the current way of things but it has yet to be challenged in court.
I am of the opinion that when a private party leases public property for an event they do not have the full private property rights that one has leasing private property. If the operator of an event wishes to restrict firearms then they should hold said event on private lands.
I believe that preemption still applies.
Otherwise all Seattle or any other anti-2A city would need to do to ban guns and get around preemption would be to simply give a private non-profit group a 99 year lease on all public parks, stadiums, arenas, campgrounds etc. The city could have as a condition of the lease that guns are banned.
IS it a preemption issue? I thot that since they were leasing the premises, they can legally get away with it (or at least the lessee can).
Wasn't that actually decided in a state SC case tho? Think it was only a few years ago.
Essentially, that's what Pacific Northwest Shooting Park Assoc. v. City of Sequim, (2006) says. However, there is a school of supported by at least a couple of cases, as I recall (can look them up if you want cite) that imply the contrary. The more "open to the public" a venue becomes, the more it becomes subject to state law and the constitution (I posted a cite to that on another thread).
Their web site states that "The following is a list of items that are prohibited at all KeyArena events. ... Fireworks, firearms, or other weapons (including all knives, mace or pepper spray)." The way I read it, the fact that it specifies "all" means that, at least facially, they intend their rules to apply even to city-sponsored events. That is preempted.
Considering the possibility of a lessee's "rule" prohibiting firearms, checking the "terms" on the back of my ticket to Bob Dylan's concert, there is no reference to firearms and no reference to any location of additional rules (physical or online). Once I offer to purchase a ticket to an event, they accept my offer, and I pay them consideration (the ticket cost), the contract is complete and on the terms agreed to by the parties. Although UCC-1 (the sale of goods, only) terms may be "borrowed" for general contracts, UCC-1 does not restrict firearms, so that cannot be "borrowed." I argue that the contract is enforceable and does not address firearms. The Washington Supes likely would not agree.
The conflicts found in PNSPA relate to the relationship between PNSPA and the city of Sequim. That is distinguishable from the relationship between a venue (private, or otherwise) and a member of the general public. Apparently, KeyArena acknowledges this to a degree such that Edie does not state in the response letter that there is a full-blown prohibition. Perhaps the relationship between the venue and the general public will need to be tested in court since the holding in PNSPA specifically dodged that bullet on technical grounds.
Not to my knowledge, but I could be wrong.