From: bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Mass. GOAL (Was: Carry in public places)
Date: 17 Oct 92 00:13:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: iftccu.13400050
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane Group



[MODERATOR:  This is good information to post as followup to the previous
question, and answers what was asked.  But in perspective, we're getting
'way off track from our charter.  How about it, folks, off to t.p.g. or
offline after this.  Thanks as usual ... ]

/ iftccu:rec.guns / cramer@optilink.com (Clayton Cramer) /  8:16 pm  Oct 13, 1992 /

#Not in a bar.  The City of Renton passed an ordinance prohibiting
#carry in a bar, even if you aren't drinking.  The Second Amendment
#Foundation pursued a lawsuit to test the limits of local regulation
#in Washington State.  In _Second Amendment Foundation_ v. _City
#of Renton_, 25 Wash. App. 583, 668 P.2d 596 (1983), the Washington
#Court of Appeals held that this was a "reasonable regulation" of
#the RKBA.  The Renton ordinance exempted restaurants that served
#alcohol, and the bartender, but any place that is a bar, is off
#limits.

But the law has been changed since then.....  At least I hope that this
is the old case I'm thinking of and not something new.

#
#I'm not sure if any other cities in Washington have similar rules,
#but since I don't drink anyway, I just make the assumption that when
#carrying in Washington, I won't enter a bar.

Well, the above statement is true, but can be misleading for those not
familiar with Washington's strange (compared to some places at least)
liqueur laws.  Washington doesn't have bars in the sense that some
states do.  Basically liqueur licenses come in two flavors.  Actually
there are at least six different classes of license, but we'll discuss
the two most common.  Wine and beer (taverns) and bars (hard liqueur +
wine and beer).

Taverns are not required to serve food.  All bars are required to serve
food and always have an associated restaurant.  You can get liqueur in
the restaurant as well as in the bar.  It used to be that bars were
required to generate 50% of their revenue from food sales.  I don't
think this is strictly true any more, it may be that the percentage has
changed or that it no longer exists.  At any rate, you can still walk
into the restaurant, portion of the premises sit down, order a beer or
mixed drink and be completely legal.  Please note, it IS illegal to be
drunk and packing, so you may be able to do this only once or twice per
evening!  Since all portions of taverns (can't let kids be near wine and
beer!) are off limits to those under 21, you can't carry into any
portion of a tavern.

At any rate, after the Renton case (and similar ones) one faction of our
state legislature saw problems for our RKBA.  Thus new legislation was
passed which traded carrying in over 21 areas of bars and taverns for a
state wide preemption of local anti gun legislation.  I guess you could
call this a true compromise.  As near as I can recall, this was
somewhere between 5 and 10 years ago.

Strangely enough, the bar exclusion, (which excludes only those portions
of a premises that serve liqueur and are off limits to those under 21)
isn't in 9.41 (where most of the firearms laws are) but rather buried in
the LCB laws.  Sigh.  At any rate, the Renton law is invalid. 9.41
states in part that no political subdivision of the state may make any
firearms law more restrictive than state law.  This has been tested in
court, although I don't have the cites handy.

This doesn't stop them however.  I've never been turned away from public
activities in Seattle for example, but I know a few individuals that
have.  (Seattle passed some silly law about not packing at public events
such as sports games etc.)  Most of them aren't rich enough to press it
in court.  In general, if you are polite and firm, stating that the law
is illegal and you know your rights, you will generally at least be
allowed to leave with your gun.  (Any maybe trying a different
entrance?)  Seattle knows they can't win a court case, but they are
betting you won't know your rights, or want to spend the money to fight
it.  Basically it is simply a form of harassment.  If you are foolish
enough to surrender your weapon you not see it again for quite some
time, if ever, unless you take fast legal action.

Rick.