Seattle Police Sgt. Dorothy Kim and Officer Sean Hamlin bag a rifle (courtesy
Previous Post
Next Post

“In most cases, the gun removal task force chooses the route of persuasion. Anderson says that means a lot of time on the phone, talking to the gun owners’ lawyers — and their family. ‘We call people’s moms, we call their aunt, we call their uncle,’ he says. ‘And we explain to them, ‘look, he’s not just a risk to the victims, and he’s a risk to himself. And it’s just better if we have the guns.'” – What It Takes To Get Guns Out Of The Wrong Hands [via]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Guns? What guns? And this is why we don’t register them. Yes, I know there are some people who shouldn’t have them, but eventually the government could decide that none of us should have them. One thing I’ve heard the antis say is that there should be a mental evaluation before you can own a gun. Guess what? We’re all crazy!

    • “Guns? What guns? And this is why we don’t register them.”

      And that is why they are making registration *mandatory* with “Universal background checks”…

      • The state of Washington knows when you buy a handgun or a long gun. The state knows what you bought. Now if I go to Oregon and buy a long gun, the state of Washington has no idea. Can’t do much about the pistols here. There’s been a de-facto Firearms registry here for a long time. Cuz we also need to get a background check from the sheriff’s department who keeps track of who buys what.

    • A lot of them have figured out that they’re not going to be able to overtly ban firearms. Hence, efforts to make guns and ammunition too expensive to own via overt and covert taxes.

      Have more than 100 rounds of ammunition or 3 guns, $500 arsenal tax. Want to buy a box of ammo, $25 tax. (Environmental tax-all that metallurgy of brass, copper plating and lead is toxic after all.)

      “Crazy” people shouldn’t have guns so let’s require a $1,000-$2,000 psych evaluation every year if you have a gun. As one commentator points out, “Everybody’s crazy” to one degree or another allowing both a covert tax and the ability to create a de facto ban until gun/ammunition manufacturers are driven out of business.

      50 years after the ‘68 GCA, Heller and it’s progeny, the antis are getting a little smarter.

        • The long and the short of this game is MAD. If Mathew Broderick has taught us anything, it’s that the only way to win, is not to play.

          America has become ungovernable. It really is a house divided against itself, as we have become others to ourselves. The only long term solution is, as the celebrities call it, a conscious uncoupling. Peacefully is preferable, but happening one way or another, I fear, is inevitable.


        • @Johnathon,

          Depends on how long it takes. Leftists have the schools and universities, even in red states. Add to this the economic refugees from CA and NY who leave for better opportunities but don’t understand that the voting habits they bring with them are the root of the problem. Then, mass immigration by people who come from areas of the world where some form of authoritarian system is the norm. I could perhaps see states which are generally supportive of Western individual liberty making a break, but I think it would take a pretty drastic event to get it started. And the longer they wait the less likely it is to happen. The frog in the slowly warming pot is real.

        • Bingo,give that fellow a cigar !

          It’s happened in the last thirty years to Vermont.
          Refugees from Pelosi and Shumerholes have almost taken over the entire state government, even our republicane governor could have any alphabet after his name C/P/D. How do you think a Communist like the Burnmeister would be elected U S senator and while the fights not over they are gaining and they know it.

    • No one, including government, should ever be the entity that determines a person shouldn’t own a firearm. The 2nd Amendment recognizes possession as a God-given right. If a crime is committed with a firearm, then the law should be enforced.

    • I would imagine the next thing the Anti’s want to do is come and take my vocal chords because I might yell “FIRE” in a crowded movie theater.

  2. Meanwhile in Kentucky: (Yes I know I posted this elsewhere but seriously Kentuckians on here need to see this and need to start bugging the crap out of their state reps to get the School Marshal bill passed!)

    Just hours after the shooting, his Republican colleague, state Sen. Steve West, rushed to file a bill to put more guns in schools.

    His legislation would let local districts hire armed marshals to patrol public schools, make citizen’s arrests and protect people from “imminent death or serious physical injury.”

    Marshals wouldn’t have to be police officers, but school district employees in good standing who have a license to carry concealed weapons.

    West’s bill is one of at least two in the state that would allow more guns into Kentucky’s public schools and college campuses. They reflect a sentiment that has found bipartisan support.

    “We need armed officers in every school in Kentucky. That is a small price to pay if it saves one child’s life,” state Sen. Ray Jones, a Democrat, said.

    In the conservative state where politicians routinely pose in ads with guns, the National Rifle Association has an outsized influence in many state elections and the resulting gun policy debates in those legislatures.

    Some Democrats, however, believe the push for more guns is misplaced.

    Democratic Rep. Attica Scott from Louisville said she is “definitely an advocate for gun safety and to me more guns is not the answer to gun violence.”

    Scott has filed legislation that would ban those convicted of hate crimes from carrying a gun and let local governments pass laws requiring gun sellers to use “responsible business practices.”

    “We are sending prayers and thoughts to kids who are clinging to the last bit of faith they have in the system of government that is supposed to keep them safe.”

    Meanwhile, Democratic Rep. Jim Wayne of Louisville has filed a bill that would make it a crime for adults to “recklessly” store a gun without a trigger lock, a measure aimed at preventing children and teenagers from obtaining access to their parents’ guns.

    Note the only two against it are from Louisville and democrats… Since Louisville has been a big blue bastion for decades it doesn’t surprise me a bit.

    and here’s the parent article link:

    Kentuckians start emailing, calling, mailing, and harassing your state senators now and get them to support a real common sense initiative to protect our children in schools.

    • “to kids who are clinging to the last bit of faith they have in the system of government that is supposed to keep them safe.””

      There’s a big part of the problem right there. The “government” has absolutely no interest in keeping them “safe,” and no legal obligation to do so – by their own admission. The fact that it is impossible for any government to keep anyone safe, from anything, is just frosting on the cake.

      But those who believe that government could, should and will “keep them safe” is the poison too many people keep swallowing. Until it gets them killed.

      • @MamaLiberty: That’s Louisville though… They are starting to go full libtarded. Notice the other Democrat sited in the article said: “We need armed officers in every school in Kentucky. That is a small price to pay if it saves one child’s life,” Ray Jones (D).

        Anyway here’s the important part of that whole article and the reason I posted it a couple times in different articles.

        Just hours after the shooting, state Sen. Steve West (R), rushed to file a bill to put more guns in schools.

        His legislation would let local districts hire armed marshals to patrol public schools, make citizen’s arrests and protect people from “imminent death or serious physical injury.”

        MARSHALS WOULDN’T HAVE TO BE POLICE OFFICERS, but school district employees in good standing who have a license to carry concealed weapons.

        West’s bill is one of at least two in the state that would allow more guns into Kentucky’s public schools and college campuses. They reflect a sentiment that has found bipartisan support.

        See according to the bill Mr. West introduced The Marshals won’t necessarily be cops they could be teachers, principals, or any other school employee in good standing that can have a CCW in Kentucky. Best of all, this bill isn’t just about colleges it covers Elementary schools, Middle Schools, and High Schools too. Hopefully it eventually spreads to cover state and county government buildings as well as other state and county owned workplaces.

        Now I don’t see schools in Louisville, Frankfort, or Lexington doing this but everywhere else in the state? Oh totally, especially in less populated counties like the one I live in where more often than not the state boys can manage to get to you before the Sheriff due to a small Sheriff department and a huge friggin county. Where I work around time schools let out you can’t get a Sheriff’s Deputy to respond to anything short of Armageddon because all his units are out at all the schools in all these lil bitty towns watching kids go home for the day and making sure some idiot doesn’t run them over in the crosswalks or t bone them comin outtta the parkin lot, so you call the state troopers around that time for any issue you have that requires a police presence.

        It really is refreshing to see a common sense bill introduced that actually has bipartisan support though. This is something we’ve been preaching about on this site every time there is a school shooting in this country and now we may finally see it come to fruition on a statewide level. Sadly, most will never hear about it becoming law unless (until?) one of those Marshals screws the pooch and shoots an innocent bystander or a young yoot that was just turning his life around during an altercation on school property.

      • Pretty much, the administrators of the school I went to had little concern for actual safety and more concern for political expediency and maintaining their fiefdom. Government is a pretty poor place to put faith in large.

      • “We need armed officers in every school in Kentucky. That is a small price to pay if it saves one child’s life,” Ray Jones (D).

        Not really. If you spent money to put armed guards in every school and the only benefit was one child’s life then that is NOT a small price. I’d wager that there are 10 other accident prevention efforts you could spend that same money on and save more lives. Just keeping it honest.

  3. Unfortunately, there is NO percentage in complaining about the police taking guns from prohibited persons.

    We have a “Prohibited-Persons” law. (We are NOT entirely satisfied with it, but that is a separate topic.) Now, the court has declared Joe to be a P-P. There is nothing unlawful or unconstitutional about proceeding responsibly to collect his guns. I hasten to add that there is nothing to stop Joe from getting another gun; most likely, collecting the guns he has at any given moment is a waste of effort.

    We PotG need to decide whether we want the light shining on ourselves – the peaceable, law-abiding gun owners – or on the criminals. I vote for the latter. Our main issue with Public Relations ought to be: ‘Leave us alone; go after the criminals!’ It is counter-productive for us to say: ‘Leave the criminals alone’.

    The Prohibited-Person law(s) need an overhaul. They are over-inclusive; nonsensical.

    Some of us argue that no P-P law could conceivably be Constitutional. This is irrational and bad P-R. The provision that makes a P-P any American who renounces his citizenship is clearly Constitutional. The 2A right runs to “the People”; and, it’s hard to argue that an ex-American continues to be a member of the class “the People”. That one provision is also silly. Ex-patriots are (for the most part) no threat to the public.

    It’s impossible to persuade either SCOTUS or the public that felons can’t be deprived of their 2A rights. It IS conceivable to persuade voters (and then Congressmen) that non-violent felons ought to be removed from the P-P law. That’s a place to start. (After all, certain financial felons such as price-fixers are already exempt).

    It’s really tough to explain why a P-P who is violent ought to be allowed to keep his guns. I am NOT saying it’s impossible in selective cases; it’s just TOUGH. Why spend our P-R resources on the most difficult of problems when we would be better off working on the low-hanging fruit?

    • What do you mean? Courts have found that the Constitution applies to non-citizen people living outside the US with no connection to the US who merely want to visit.

      Not withstanding that, once you give all the concessions you’re proposing to give the gun grabbers they’ll simply start chipping away at your rights too by constantly expanding who is a prohibited person and abusing the system. Pretty soon living on the same block as a prohibited person will be enough to have your firearms taken away because the prohibited person could borrow or steal yours. That’s of course assuming they don’t just find a way to label you a prohibited person.

      You can’t compromise and make nice with people who are not rational actors operating in good faith. They don’t want to take firearms just from prohibited persons / criminals. You want to concede them a bureaucratic legal framework for gun confiscation from “criminals” that they can readily abuse later. The left is very good at weaponizing a bureaucracy against it’s political opponents. Look no further than the IRS, EPA, FEC, etc.

      • Whatever rights the courts have found apply to non-citizens, the 2A needs to be considered in its own right. Is Mr/Ms. X a member of the class “the People”? If a citizen, then the answer is clearly yes. If a green-card holder, then the answer is probably yes. If neither, then the answer is unlikely to be yes. If X was once a citizen and then renounced citizenship then – I believe – it is clear that such a person is not a member of the class “the People”. Congress isn’t compelled to make X a P-P; but it is perfectly Constitutional for Congress to do so. (Incidentally, many aliens on many kinds of NON-immigrant visas are allowed to possess and even buy guns in the US.)

        You are quite right about the slippery slope, give them an inch, and so forth. Nevertheless, our resources are limited. And so, it is in our interest to expend them in those cases where we are apt to take the most ground. To expend our resources equally across every threatened position along the battle-front is wasteful.

        My point is that we ought to spend more energy on revising the P-P criteria and less on complaining about the police enforcing the P-P law by confiscating guns. We would likely get a little traction in making the case that the mental-illness criteria need reform; and, carving out many non-violent felons. The domestic violence criteria is tough politically.

        Still more significantly, I think that National-Reciprocity and Gun-Free Zones have the greatest potential for popularizing guns in America. Thereby, we gain political power with which to strengthen the acceptance of a meaningful Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

        We are working against our own best interest when we expend energy trying to secure 2A rights for violent felons, domestic abusers and really crazy people

    • “Prohibited person” is a slippery slope if ever there was one. You can count of the state using it’s powers-of-definition to expand the meaning of just what a prohibited person is. You can just bet that guns and ammo are being buried in backyards all across the country.

  4. If I was suicidal or homicidal I’d make a big show of handing in all my guns with a giant shit eating grin on my face then proceed to beat, burn, stab, crush a few people to death right before leaping to my own.

    And it’d be okay because once they got to the afterlife Peter Gabriel would see none were shot and he’d send them back to live the rest of their lives.

  5. Told you so…..Authoritarian police state….You are hear by Deemed to be a prohibited person and an enemy of the state…..

  6. ya just look at Ruby Ridge and Waco, both were about Guns! One was a premeditated set up and deliberate ploy too get a snitch by encouraging a person to commit a crime and them make a snitch out of him to make the crime go away, the other was a ploy to make a Documentary about how good the ATF was in enforcing Gun laws for funding in the Corrupt Clinton Justice Department. Federal Baby Incinerators murdered 80 children in their quest for Justice.
    Police state is already starting, special ID to fly, need a passport to go to Canada or Mexico (unless you are a radical and or an illegal Alien then they give you a free pass and welfare with free health care) got to get scanned and groped at the airport, cant have a gun in a school or area, have to get permission from mommy to buy a gun, Veterans get a double Whammy, they teach you how too use a gun then declare you defective when you get out, and won’t let you in too the system

  7. Reasons to worn a Ghost Gunner much? Or perhaps reasons to own shop tools at least. Something more generic that can’t be easily connected to the act of home fabrication of weapons.

  8. I laughed out loud after looking at the photo.
    It looks like the dood has a “rape whistle” on his neck lanyard.

  9. It gets worse.

    Things are looking pretty bleak here in WA. The Californium Consortium is taking over.

    There is a 10 round limit law in the pipeline (may it die in committee), an “assault weapons ban (though it may have been watered down to a “handgun style background check to own an AR” at this stage, which is still horseshit).

    A bump stock ban just passed the Senate and is headed to the House. No grandfather clause, just a breather period until July to turn them in.

  10. “…the gun removal task force”

    Has anyone scheduled the next revolution yet? Because with the exception of a dentist appointment next week my calendar is pretty flexible.

  11. The barista’s girlfriend has filed for a temporary protection order, and told investigators he owns a handgun. But the barista tells [Officer] Kernan he doesn’t.

    “I’ve never even handled a gun,” he says.

    Right now, the officers have no choice but to accept that.

    So, they got their dream legislation passed (ex-parte confiscation orders), and now they realize it’s absolutely unenforceable without more Constitution-stomping. Good morning, Seattle.

    It’s complicated work, figuring out whether someone owns a gun. Government records are little help — the state tracks purchase histories, but only for licensed gun stores, not gun shows and one-on-one sales.

    …unless you’re in Seattle/Washington where they passed a law mandating background checks so they could monitor prohibited persons aquiring firearms. Even though their hard-won infringements give them the data they need to confiscate “dangerous” people’s firearms, they still complain about “half measures.” It will never be enough for Progressives.

    • Rusty

      “half measures.” It will never be enough for Progressives.”

      Ever notice how regressive so called progressives are.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here