MARCH FOR OUR LIVES: What you need to know if you’re going – including that a West Seattleite is co-organizing

4:34 PM: That’s Emilia Allard. We photographed her at Chief Sealth International High School the night Mayor Jenny Durkan visited for a gun-law-reform Town Hall. She wasn’t an onstage participant that night but will be at centerstage tomorrow in a much-bigger event – as a co-organizer of the Seattle “March For Our Lives.” She is a resident of West Seattle, but you might not have heard that before as she goes to school at Ballard High. She and co-organizer Rhiannon Rasaretnam of Tahoma High School will be front and center leading the pre-march rally at Cal Anderson Park on Capitol Hill at 10 am tomorrow, then leading the march to Seattle Center. MFOL was sparked by the high-school massacre in Parkland, Florida, and is described in a reminder announcement we received today:

Students from throughout Washington State have worked to create this event as a call-to-action for elected officials to enact common sense gun safety legislation. Specifically they are asking for action on banning assault rifles, banning bump stocks nationally, raising the age for gun purchases from 18 to 21, ensuring school safety without use of firearms and calling on members of Congress and corporations to stop accepting support from or providing support for the NRA.

“We hope that what our fellow students take away from this event is that they have ignited a movement,” said Rhiannon Rasaretnam. “We will no longer wait for adults to act while children are killed every single day in their schools and in their communities. First we march, then we vote, and soon many of us will be ready to run for office to replace those members of congress who are not serving the youth, their constituents or our country.”

The coalition of student organizers continues to fundraise to pay the costs of the march. Donations can be made at: www.gofundme.com/march-for-our-lives-seattle. Any funds collected over the cost of the march will be donated to the Stoneman Douglas Victims Fund and will also be used for future March for Our Lives Seattle activities. On Saturday, march participants can also send a message to Parkland students at the fundraising tent which will be located at Seattle Center. Messages of solidarity will be gathered and shared with Parkland students.

While school shootings make headlines, 46 kids are shot due to gun violence every single day in America, the majority of these, in marginalized communities. March for Our Lives Seattle students recognize and stand in solidarity with organizations that are at the forefront of the issue of gun violence in communities of color.

If you’re going to participate, volunteer publicist Maggie has this to add:

Additionally, the organizing team would like to suggest to people to be mindful of transportation to event, as the viaduct is closed:

*Take public transportation
*Shuttles are available free back from Seattle Center to Cal Anderson
*Light rail has a stop right at Cal Anderson
*If you take Uber or Lyft, please be dropped off a few blocks from Cal Anderson to avoid adding to traffic

And if you’re participating, send a photo – editor@westseattleblog.com – thank you.

6:17 PM: Via e-mail, we’re told that a West Seattleite meet-up spot is being organized pre-march “at the playground area (SE corner) of Cal Anderson Park.”

Forest March 23, 2018 (6:29 pm)

Whether or not they can participate in their local marches, all supporters of gun safety laws have been asked to wear something orange on Saturday.

Rusty March 24, 2018 (1:21 pm)

Studied in 2013 by order of the Obama administration, done by the CDC, available for download: https://www.nap.edu/login.php?record_id=18319&page=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nap.edu%2Fdownload.php%3Frecord_id%3D18319 (pay particular attention to ‘Defensive Use of Guns’, which lists anywhere from 108,000 to 3 million defensive uses of firearms per year – as contrasted with around 33,000 firearms-related deaths per year, of which around 61% were suicides).

Maybe we could focus on enforcing existing laws, making it mandatory for all states to accurately report crimes up to the national level so that the database used for background checks is effective, better mental-health laws to allow for involuntary commitment and preventing those who are mentally ill from purchasing firearms, and closing loopholes so that any firearms purchase has to entail a federal background check. You know – things that will help solve the problem, not grandstanding against the bill of rights. These are things that a vast majority of this country would agree on, and that would be easy to actually get passed. Attacking the tool, or the bill of rights, is not a useful or even effective method of bringing people together to actually get changes that will prevent these tragedies.

Scott March 24, 2018 (8:36 pm)

Amen
JanS March 25, 2018 (1:31 pm)

you say “attacking the bill of rights”…what exactly are you talking about? Be specific, what part of the bill of rights is being attacked?
- Rusty March 25, 2018 (2:05 pm)
  
  Hi Jan –
  
  The 2nd Amendment. A lot of the rhetoric (and signs) are wanting to ban all guns. The demands listed on the seattle march groups site don’t go that far, but do say they want a ban on any semi-automatic guns. That would mean virtually ALL rifles and hand-guns, as anything that doesn’t have to be re-loaded after each shot is semi-automatic. My points are 1) a lot of the statistics and info provided by groups like everytown and march organizers are just plain wrong, and 2) Instead of demonizing groups and coming at this with faulty information, we should see where we can all agree.
  
  I agree more study is needed, and agree with some of the other points the marchers would like to see happen (like improving background checks). While any school shooting is a tragedy, legislating based on emotion coupled with incorrect information won’t help criminals and crazy folk start to suddenly obey the law. Better enforcement of existing law and our ability to identify those with serious mental issues might help though.
  - Jethro Marx March 26, 2018 (9:53 am)
    
    Your definition of semi-automatic is curious. My own idea of semi-automatic has always been that of a firearm that cycles the action for you, bleeding off some of the forces caused by discharging it. The only difference between semi and fully automatic is that one must pull the trigger each time for semi, whereas an automatic will fire as long as the trigger is depressed.
    
    By your definition a bolt-action rifle is semi-automatic, which is wack. From what you have said previously on the subject, I find it hard to believe you are unaware of this wackness, so what is your motivation for adding to the blurry cloud of basic gun knowledge amongst the populace?
    
    We will find it hard to fund more study, as there is a long-standing prohibition against government funding in that regard. Which kind of makes one think it ought to be looked into.
    - Rusty March 26, 2018 (10:40 am)
      
      Fair enough point – best definition would be what you stated, that semi-automatic is where you have to squeeze the trigger for each shot as opposed to fully automatic (machine guns) where you squeeze the trigger and it continues firing. I should not have stated re-loading, although in effect that is what you are doing when you manually cycle the bolt action rather than just pulling the trigger. I definitely could have been clearer, and wasn’t trying to obfuscate – just not great at multi-tasking.
      
      The point is that most people have no idea the range of rifles (and almost all handguns) that are ‘semi-automatic’. There is also great confusion about the term ‘assault rifle’ since there is no single characteristic that makes something an ‘assault rifle’. People confuse that with machine guns (which are already illegal) often.
      
      As stated, I completely agree that more study is needed – that is one area I agree with the marchers – any time anyone says you can’t study something, there’s something wrong. By linking about the only comprehensive study that I’ve found, I’m hoping it might help people understand some of the complexities involved.
    - Jethro Marx March 26, 2018 (9:06 pm)
      
      As long as we’re getting technical, fully automatic weapons/machine guns are not illegal at all. Almost anyone can own one, if they have enough money and are willing to jump through the right legal hoops. The use of one in a violent crime is also more or less unheard of in this country since the days of Dillinger, regardless of what movies might lead us to believe.
      
      I think the definition of an assault weapon is pretty straightforward, too, if we can shed the politics from the matter: a firearm that is designed to be used tactically to engage multiple targets at both short and medium range. This, of course, if they are well-designed, makes them copiously lethal, but it also makes them objects of interest for target shooters and weirdos who think a dozen well-armed trained assassins are coming for their flat screen tv. I can get down with the target shooters, and I have an appreciation for highly-engineered anything, but I do think the home-defense weirdos are weird. Neither of these groups of people are shooting up schools though. How do we find THAT group, and stop them? Please don’t tell me the answer is “good guy with a gun” cause that’s more movie stuff.
      
      I suppose some middle-ground, sensible gun laws might be found, but people can be a bit funny about guns.
    - Rusty March 26, 2018 (10:03 pm)
      
      Jethro –
      
      I think we just had this discussion: https://westseattleblog.com/2018/03/happening-now-local-schools-join-in-nationalstudentwalkout/#comments.
      
      I think we can agree on many issues, but in the spirit of corrections there was just a ‘good guy with a gun’ that stopped a school shooting in Maryland, as well as the man who helped stop the Sutherland Springs shooter with his AR15. That shooter should not have been able to purchase a gun either, if the Air Force had reported his domestic violence court-matial. In the report linked above, it estimates 108,000 – 3 million defensive uses of firearms per year, so to ridicule the ‘good-guy-with-a-gun’ narrative seems odd.
      
      I certainly don’t want the wild west in our kids schools, but allowing a school employee who has solid experience, familiarity, and training to have access to a firearm (stored in a gun safe) with mandated continuous training standards would make me feel better. It wouldn’t be every school, but enough to possibly discourage an attempt. There are better ideas to help correct the problem we both can agree on, but saying any place is a ‘safe place’ or ‘gun-free zone’ will never matter to a murderer.
    - Chuck Jacobs March 26, 2018 (10:36 pm)
      
      Machine guns are indeed legal under federal law if you submit to an FBI background check and pay a $200 tax stamp. However they are illegal for civilians to posess in Washington State unless aquired prior to July 1, 1994, (see RCW 9.41.190). The last time that a full auto firearm was used in a crime that I know of was the North Hollywood shootout in Feb. 1997.
      
      The features which define an assault weapon are almost entirely cosmetic and have nothing to do with enhancing their “copious leathality”; from Wikipedia:
      
      Common attributes used in legislative definitions of assault weapons include:
      Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine with: a folding or telescoping stock, a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, bayonet lug, threaded barrel, grenade launcher, barrel shroud.
      
      You may think the home-defense weirdos are weird, but how would you feel about having a gun in your home if you were one of the folks in this WSB forum post?
      https://westseattleblog.com/forums-2/topic/spd-response-time/
      
      As for stopping school shooters, they are always and only stopped by a “good guy with a gun”.
    - Jethro Marx March 26, 2018 (11:23 pm)
      
      Looks like Wikipedia’s definition kinda sucks, although that is indeed the one more or less used in the last “assault weapon” “ban” by our kinda sucky legislators. Is Wikipedia our arbiter of what is and what isn’t? Standards limbo, I suppose.
      
      As to your hearsay anecdote, I would’ve liked the police to show up more quickly if it were me, but the end of the story is, the cops came, arrested the guy, and no one got hurt, so who needs a gun? We talk about what does happen, not what coulda. Would you have shot the guy for pooping? ‘Cause I’m pretty sure that’s manslaughter. If you created a confrontation where you could legally shoot him, that just makes you a jerk who likes to kill people. And that’s why people think gun owners are weirdos.
      
      Your good guys with guns are usually too late to do more than mete out some frontier justice, which, while popular with the mob, has never provided a lot of answers.