Renton attorney Bob Warden filed a preliminary injunction against Mayor Greg Nickels and the City of Seattle in United States District Court on Sunday Dec. 13 in his effort to overturn the ban against carrying guns on Seattle Park Department property.

The ban was put in place by Mayor Nickels in the form of Executive Order 07­08 entitled “Gun Safety at City Facilities,” Seattle Parks Department Rule/Policy Number P 060­8.14.

In the injunction Warden writes,
"The Seattle Parks Department gun ban at issue in this case could not possibly withstand strict scrutiny. First, Defendants have not articulated a compelling government interest to justify the ban. The purported interest, to protect children from gun violence, has no substance and no objective facts behind it.

For example, how many children have been hurt or threatened by firearms in Seattle Parks Department facilities in the last year, ten years, or ever? The rate of actual or threatened gun violence against children in Seattle Parks Department facilities would have to be substantial to demonstrate a compelling government interest.

But Defendants have not cited even a single instance of actual or threatened violence in their justification contained within the written ban. Defendants do nothing more than baselessly throw out the mere idea of child safety, and then leave it there to fend for itself without the slightest bit of objective fact or credible evidence behind it. Defendants' gun ban is not narrowly tailored to achieve their interest.

If the goal is to protect the safety of children (or anyone, for that matter), then banning trained, law­abiding, concealed pistol licensed citizens does not advance that goal. In fact, banning armed good guys likely makes a place less safe from bad guys (who will carry guns regardless of any signage out front), not more safe.

Defendants do cite in their written ban a study by University of Pennsylvania researchers that found that "people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." However, their sample of persons shot by a gun while carrying a gun was composed mostly of drug dealers, others with criminal records, cab drivers, and women being stalked. In other words, the sample was of individuals who were already in danger of violence before they strapped on their pistols.

Is anyone enlightened by the stunningly obvious claim that armed drug dealers are more likely to be shot by guns than your average person?"

Elsewhere in the injuction Warden sites legal precedent and includes an article from Reason.com by Jacob Sullum that debunks a study cited by the City of Seattle in the ban that claims,"people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun."

Warden continues,
"Defendants have promulgated a rule that significantly impacts a fundamental civil right without articulating any objective rationale for doing so. Defendants claim to want to protect children without providing the slightest evidence to suggest that any children were in any danger, or are in any less danger with the rule in place. To achieve this dubious interest, Defendants have proclaimed that hundreds of Parks Department properties are now "gun free zones," thus creating target rich environments for violent criminals who choose to 16 ignore the gun ban. Put bluntly, the gun ban is a fatally flawed solution to a problem that simply does not exist."

The Judge in the case is Honorable Marsha J. Pechman.