Interesting and shockingly evenhanded well written article on firearms on fire dept. property

[speltwon]

In south King County...

And in the P-I? Then, I realized it's a reprint of an article from the Federal Way Mirror lol

Anyway, great article. I suggest reading the whole thing before commenting. It covers a lot of ground.
http://www.seattlepi.com/sound/436456_sound117204133.html

Is a decades-old South King Fire and Rescue district policy that bans the carrying of guns on its property contrary to state law?

As with most legal questions, there’s some ambivalence. The issue was raised at a Feb. 22 meeting of the South King Fire Commissioners. A member of the public angrily expressed his disappointment at the department policy that prohibits members of the public — and South King employees — from carrying guns, except police. The ban covers all property of the department, from public spaces like the commissioners’ meeting room to more private areas like firefighters’ kitchens. “It’s perfectly legal,” said Dave Workman, a spokesman for the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation, on carrying guns in public places. “Hell, you can carry a gun into the state Capitol. People do it all the time.

“The fire department is on really shaky legal ground to do something like that.” “The policy has been around for 20 years,” said South King spokeswoman Kendra Kay. “Our legal counsel has ensured us” that it’s legal

South King cites two court cases to support its policy. From 1990, Cherry v. Seattle Metro dealt with a bus driver (the agency has since become King County Metro) who was fired for carrying a gun at work. The driver sued (he was also carrying other weapons and contraband at the time), but the state Supreme Court eventually ruled that employers can ban employees from carrying guns at work.

Attorney Mark Marshall defended Seattle Metro in that case. He said he argued the case narrowly in terms of employer rights — he didn’t want to get into a larger Second Amendment battle.

“It’s a work rule,” he said of the case. “We’re not trying to control the activities of the public.”