WA Gun Rights

 Many in the gun rights community have talked about the fact that the police have no duty to protect an individual citizen, but the citizenry as a whole.  This 911 call from a woman in Josephine County illustrates that problem that we face as individual citizens living our lives.  In August 2012 a female called said that her ex-boyfriend was outside her house and trying to break in.  She also told the dispatcher that the last time he did the she ended up in the hospital.  She later told the dispatcher that “it doesn’t matter, if he gets into the house I am done.”

In 2005 the Supreme Court heard the case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales and concluded that there is no constitutional right to individual police protection, even if there is a protection order in place.  While there was no protection order in place in this case, the female caller did tell the dispatcher that there was a history of violence, and that a few weeks before she had been in the hospital because of her ex-boyfriend.

(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

In 2012 the Josephine county sheriff’s office put out a schedule for shutting down their services. In that press release, found here, it is made clear that the hours for patrol will be 8 hours per day, 5 days per week.  It also makes clear that calls for life threatening emergency after hours that Oregon State Police will be able to respond in a limited capacity, and only to stop an immediate threat.  It also goes on to say that Josephine County Sheriff’s Office will not respond to any calls outside their reduced hours, giving citizens fair warning that they would be without police protection.

The Josephine County Sheriff’s Office was faced with a $7.5 million budget shortfall, and was forced to cut 65 positions within the department.  After there was cuts made to the department,  Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilbertson released a statement urging victims of domestic violence to “consider relocating to an area with adequate law enforcement services.”

When speaking with the Oregon State Police dispatcher, the dispatcher told the caller “Um, I don’t have anyone that I can send out there.” and then goes on to tell the caller that “You know, obviously, if he comes inside the residence and assaults you, can you ask him to go away? Do you know if he’s intoxicated or anything?”

The caller was later told by the dispatcher to just find somewhere to hide, in a last ditch attempt to keep the caller safe.  In the end the caller was physically choked and then sexually assaulted. Her ex-boyfriend, Michael Bellah, was arrested the next day by Oregon State Police.

Unfortunately stories like this will start becoming more common as money runs out and departments have to lay off officers and deputies in order to balance their budgets.  People will need to either move to somewhere that police services are available or take precautions and steps to ensure their own safety.

While everyone out there needs to evaluate their needs in terms of self protection, we do live in an uncertain world where things happen.  All too often we see people that rely of the police to protect them and their families from harm.  In a recent informal poll several people told this column that calling police was their number one means of protection from someone intruding into their home.  Most responding to the poll said that they had no other means other than using household items such as kitchen knives or a broom handle.

If anything can be learned from the tragedy it is that we the people need to be responsible for our own safety and cannot rely on someone else to protect them, even the police.  Sometimes law enforcement is tied up with something and cannot get there, other times there might not be a department at all.

This shows the need for private gun ownership in this country.  The question always comes up asking why people need to own guns, and have them in their home.  This call becoming public highlights that need.  We have a fundamental right to self protection and cannot rely on the police, if they even exist in our area, to come to our aid all the time.  Sometimes we need to take matters into out own hands and protect ourselves and our loved ones.  Unfortunately in this case, the caller was unable to protect herself, tragically ending up a victim of not only the suspect, but also the system that she relied on to protect her.

As of this writing there is no reason found as to why this caller might have been prevented from owning a firearm.  Calls placed to Josephine County and Oregon State Police for comment were not returned.

As our nation goes down a path of passing gun control legislation, we have to stop and wonder if our representatives even understand what they are talking about.  So the question that gun owners are asking today is “Do these representatives even know what they are talking about?”

The answer to that is dubious right now, with with the comments of Rep. Diana DeGette at a meeting in Denver, CO. While participating in a Denver Post forum on gun control she began talking about how magazines are bullets and will decrease in numbers as people shoot them.  The video can be found here.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette is drawing national ridicule for an inaccurate statement she made Tuesday about magazines (RJ Sangosti, The Denver Post)

What’s the efficacy of banning these magazine clips? I will tell you, these are ammunition, they’re bullets,” She said.

She continuing that statement with “ the people who have those now, they’re going to shoot them, she number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will be shot and there won’t be any more available.”

The comments she made drew a laugh from the audience.

According to Juliet Johnson, the spokesperson for Rep. DeGette, the congresswoman “misspoke.” She also told the Denver Post that “The congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,”

So which is it? Clips can be reused as well, so they are not going to disappear as they are used.  So even with the correction that was issued from her office, the correction is also wrong.  So some are saying that it can be definitively state that Rep. DeGette has absolutely no idea what she is talking about when it comes to ammunition feeding devices for firearms.

When Rep. DeGette introduced a bill earlier this year to ban so called high capacity magazines.  Rep. DeGette makes the claim that what she calls high capacity magazines “have enabled high numbers of casualties in almost every recent mass shooting in American history.”

What her statement shows is the complete lack of knowledge about firearms, their parts and how they function.  Yet Rep. DeGette feels that she is qualified to try to pass legislation about something that she doesn’t even understand. Many online forums, from second amendment to hunting forums are discussing this very topic online right now.

Many are beginning to ask what else our elected officials have worked on, or passed in the way of restrictions without knowing anything about the topic.  Earlier this year there was general outrage over the warrantless search portion of the ban on so called “assault weapons.”  Senators Kine and Kohl-Welles claimed they didn’t even know that there was a provision in the bill that would allow law enforcement to come into your home to inspect your assault weapons without a warrant, or cause.

“I frankly should have vetted this more closely.” Senator Kohl-Welles told Danny Westneat for this article in the Seattle Times.  Even though Sen. Kohl-Welles sponsored the same bill, with the same language three other times in the past.

When we are subject to laws that lawmakers pass “on our behalf.” I one would venture a guess that they would either research the topic themselves, or have a staffer that does some research, and gives them relevant information.  But more often we are seeing that the opposite is true, especially with gun control.  Our elected officials have no idea what they are talking about, and yet we, the citizens, are the ones that will lose in the end.

Coverage of the tragedy unfolding in Aurora, CO as soon as can get to a computer. Follow me on twitter for coverage until then. http://twitter.com/wagunrights

I thought that I posed this a while back… But when I went to look for it tonight I found that it is not posted here.

So here it is…  There is an audio file after the description for your listening pleasure…

February 10, 2012 I was detained in my local Walmart after going to pick up my prescription that were ready. I walked in, past an officer that in their car and already there talking to someone else about something else on my way into the store.  I went in to the pharmacy, stood in line, sat down for a few while they finished up something. Then I checked out, and left the store. No one said anything, no one went running, I didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary.  When I walked out there was an officer pulling up and getting out of his car. I took note and kept walking to my car. Then I heard this guy screaming “OFFICER! OFFICER! Over there!” He was pointing in my direction. I started my recorder and waited for contact because I didn’t want the officer to be able to use my plates against me, so I choose to stay away from my car.  Which is also why I choose to not “walk and talk” as suggested…

Click play and it will play the audio file of the encounter.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

One thing that the anti-gun movement seems to be pushing for on all fronts recently is the removal of state preemption (RCW 9.41.290). So let’s take a moment and take a look at what removal of state preemption would actually mean for the average law-abiding gun owner. First we must understand what state preemption is, and what it does for everyone in the state that is legally carrying a firearm.

No guns signs could crop up in a town near you…

State preemption was designed so that all the laws in the state regarding the carry of firearms were exactly the same from border to border. The intent behind the state preemption statute was to do away with a patchwork of gun laws across the state that it law-abiding gun owner would have to navigate through if they were traveling anywhere within the state. So what does this look like for the average gun owner? It looks like a patchwork of gun laws that would be nearly impossible to keep up with and to be able to follow each law and keep up with the laws of each city that you travel through on a daily basis.

Imagine trying to take a trip from Seattle to Ellensburg, you would pass through six different cities and two counties. Now imagine that you wanted to carry your firearm with you and make sure you stay within the law. Imagine having to research and understand the eight different statues just to make the two-hour drive from Seattle to Ellensburg. What you could also end up running into is local cities with a complete ban on handguns like San Francisco passed in 2005. This would mean that you would need to detour completely around that city, possibly adding hours to your trip just to comply with the law.

What this creates is a hardship on the average citizen that wishes to comply with the law. It does nothing to deter a criminal from using a gun. We already have state laws on the books that cover illegal use of a firearm; we also have statutes the cover unlawful carrying or handling of firearms. So how any municipality thinks that creating more laws is going to have a significant impact on gun crimes is beyond comprehension. Handgun bans have been proven to not be effective in actually cause’s violent crime rates to go up.

Looking at San Francisco’s crime data in 2006 there were 86 homicides in the city. That was one year after Proposition H was passed by voters banning all private handgun ownership within the city of San Francisco. In 2008 the ban was repealed by the courts affirming the rights of the citizens. In 2009 a year after the ban was struck down homicides were down by nearly half. While that evidence appears to be anecdotal; it also goes to show that there is a correlation between banning firearms out rights and crime rates. In 2003 and 2004 the two years prior to Proposition H homicide rates in the city of San Francisco were 69 and 88, respectively. In 2005 is when the rate spiked and there was 96 homicides that year, the high rate of homicides is maintained for all three years but the handgun ban was in place. Only dropping off when the courts repealed the handgun ban.

What we need to look at is enforcing the laws that we have on the on the books already, and not making more restrictive laws. Whether it is federal law, state law or even local ordinances the police and prosecutors need to enforce the law to the best of their ability. They need to stop allowing people to enter into plea agreements in order to keep their conviction rates up. Many times criminals are allowed to plead guilty to lesser crimes for reduced sentences. If a change in gun violence is the answer we are looking for, then we need to ask the right questions and work within the laws that we already have.

Rahwa Habte engaging in mock violence.

Recently the Town Hall Seattle held a public safety meeting with Seattle city leaders as the panel. On the panel was a young woman by the name of Rahwa Habte, and organizer for OneAmerica. OneAmerica is an immigrant empowerment group, and self-promotes being the largest immigrant rights group in Washington State. Rahwa Habte spent her time in the panel that night denouncing violence, all forms of violence.

So it would seem shocking to find a picture of her and someone with the twitter handle @selutitu mock sword fighting, and pretending to kill someone with a sword. This is rather shocking to find posted by someone claiming to denounce all violence. On her biography on her organizations website it states that “Rahwa has led, taken part in and supported numerous campaigns, actions and grassroots efforts to…end violence in all its forms.”

This seems to highlight the amount of hypocrisy that the anti-gun movement is willing to partake in. What is sad about this photo it that it glorifies violence, and make a mockery of people that have been killed. While some might claim that sword violence is not prevalent. A quick search reveals a several stories, such as actor Michael Brea killing his mother with a sword and a landlord that killed his tenant with a sword. So is this just harmless fun, or is it a troubling that someone against violence would think this is ok behavior to engage in? Or is this troubling behavior for someone who is looked up to in their community for answers? We already know it is deplorable behavior for someone that is such a “community leader” against violence.

An email has been sent to OneAmerica for their comments on their organizer’s behavior. As of this writing no reply has been received and the photos is still posted to her twitter account here.

Let’s start this off the right way… Seattle City council woman Sally Bagshaw is a moron. A complete and utter liberal moron. There now that we have that out of the way… Let’s discuss why… She recently posted a list of 16 things that we can do now to curb gun violence. Some of it is good, things that even people in the gun community can agree with… But most of it is just flat out moronic liberalism and rhetoric at its best…

The problem with this is that there are plenty of laws on the books to enforce here. This mindset of making more laws against the same thing is getting out of hand. The reason that criminals are criminals is that they break the law. Making a new law doesn’t mean NOW a criminal will listen and give up their ways. It just means that you will regulate the people that will follow the laws.

This list can be found here. Obviously it will be without my comments though… My answers to hers are in red… Her rhetoric is in blue…

1. Short term, we put more police officers on patrol. The city’s police force is stretched thin, we know that. Nonetheless, we must put more trained officers visibly on the street to calm fears and deter further violence.
   
   1. I agree, let’s get more officers on the street. Let’s make them more visible. But let’s also make them enforce the laws already on the books. I DO NOT walk down the street and see a police officer and think of how safe I feel. I take my OWN safety into my OWN hands. That is what we need to teach people, that their safety is their own responsibility and not someone else’s. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?
      
2. We must identify the shooters. Our officers are tracking down leads and investigating the cases, but they can’t do it alone. They need help from eye witnesses, and the sooner we can identify the shooters and get them off the streets, the safer we all will be. There are various ways of reporting that can help all of our families and friends. Call 911 if you see or hear something needing immediate police response, or 206-625-5011 if there is something important to report but no immediate danger, or call 1-800-222-8477 if you want to remain anonymous. Report what you saw or heard, even if the information is incomplete; you may be saving a life tomorrow. We who live in this community – youth and adults – are the only ones who can break the code of silence and start a new safe way of being. The code of silence perpetuates fear and death.
   
   1. This really sounds like the thought police here. How do you identify the shooters and get them off the streets before something happens? I think someone might do something… Go take their guns and arrest them. The fact of the matter remains that you cannot do anything to someone unless they have broken a law. I do agree that people should be on the lookout for things that don’t look right and they should report them. If someone is talking about something call someone. But this will breed a society of people relying on government to protect them and turning in someone they don’t like or agree with.  That one sounds familiar…
      
3. If our police department needs emergency help, we should find the temporary resources. King County, the University of Washington police, and other local law enforcement agencies have provided immediate help under our mutual aid agreements during the most recent shootings, for which we are thankful. Across the board, officers and detectives respond quickly and professionally, even when they are challenged with increasing workloads. Increasing their numbers permanently requires significant restructuring, or hiring more trained officers, something we must carefully consider in the next budget cycle.
   
   1. Mutual aid agreements are a great law enforcement tool for getting more officers when they are needed for a large scale event. Go for it…
      
4. To keep the streets safe, additional investigators must be funded and trained so cases can be investigated and referred for prosecution. The number of detectives has shrunk as the police department has taken detectives to back-filled for other needs. This is understandable knowing the budget reductions, yet our detectives are crucial to the smoothly flowing system. Before a matter can be sent to the Prosecuting Attorney for trial, our detectives must thoroughly investigate the case and prepare it for prosecution. Because our detective unit has been reduced in size and the shootings have increased in number, our detectives have had to stop investigating some cases mid-stream to start investigating the next. Our detective unit has been cut down to the bare bones; more support is needed.
   
   1. Prosecute bad guys? Now there is an idea.
      
5. We must ask our legislators for help: Amend the laws to require a background check for EVERY firearm sold in this state. In Washington State, anyone can go to a gun sale and buy from a private seller. This includes felons and those with significant mental illnesses.  I was chilled when I visited a gun show a few years back and saw on every table little home-made signs saying “No ID Required, No Sales Tax Collected.” At that gun show, I watched hundreds of people buying and selling shotguns, handguns, assault weapons and all types of ammunition, including that designed to inflict tremendous harm on the human body.
   
   1. See number 6 for part of this… I don’t require a government check to buy a car or a hamburger from someone, why should I have to pay for a check to buy a firearm from someone? The way to actually read this one is that they are upset there is NO SALES TAX being collected. Requiring a check allows them to run them through someone that will then collect sales tax for the county. Let’s all be honest here. You were more chilled about the sign saying “No Sales Tax Collected.” The last part of this talking about ammo designed to inflict tremendous harm, that is called hallow points.  They are designed to transfer energy to an assailant and not go though and injure someone.  So they are actually a public service.  If your cops can carry them, what can’t a law abiding citizen?  Are we not good enough?  What ever happened to “by the people, for the people?” Now we have government telling the people that they are better than us? 
      
6. We need criminal background checks on all gun sales, including at gun shows. Washington is the ONLY West-coast state that hasn’t closed this “gun show loophole.” I call upon our legislature to work with us and close the gun show loophole in the State of Washington. We should use these shootings to unite around this principle and demand this change: no successful background check, no gun.
   
   1. There is no gun show loophole. Guns purchased at gun shows through a dealer go through the same background check as someone that purchases it at a gun shop as long as they are purchased though a dealer and not a private person. There is NO loophole in this state. When will they learn this and stop just parroting the same old shit time and again? It is really starting to get old…
      
7. Require permits to carry a gun. Today it’s perfectly legal to walk down the streets of Seattle with a loaded gun, so long as it’s in plain view. No permit is required to carry a gun in the open. I have seen people wear their guns into City Hall to make a point that they can. This next legislative session, join me in respectfully asking our legislature to amend the current law. Require everyone who carries a gun to acquire a permit, whether it’s openly carried on a belt like a cell phone or concealed under a jacket. Most other states, including Texas, require this type of permit. And while we’re at it, we should toughen up the concealed weapon permit process and require all hand gun carriers to attend and pass a certified gun safety course. We require driver’s education; let’s require gun carriers to do their homework too.
   
   1. I have a license to carry a firearm concealed. If I choose to open carry it I have a license for that too… It’s called Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution and the Second Amendment of the United State Constitution. Just in case you forgot about those two documents… I see that you remember the First Amendment quite well though…
      
8. Provide local authority to cities and towns to ban guns from parks, community centers, and other public locations. While we are focusing on Olympia, let’s amend the state’s pre-emption law codified in RCW 9.41.300(2)(b). The legislature could help make us safer by granting local authority to cities and towns to exclude guns from certain public areas such as our parks, community centers, and Seattle Center. Working with our City Attorney Pete Holmes (a hunter himself, by the way, who grew up knowing how to safely use guns), and Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg, Seattle City Council can call upon the legislature to provide us with the authorization we need to make our city safer.
   
   1. Here is where you really lose your mind… Remove state preemption so that every city and county can make their own laws? Let’s create such a patchwork of laws that we can just charge anyone with a gun with a crime… There is a reason that we have state pre-emption. It protects those that OBEY the law. Those that do NOT obey the laws will NOT OBEY THE NEW LAWS EITHER! There is a news flash. Last time I checked shooting someone is (generally) against the law. So if someone chooses to shoot someone, who in their right mind thinks that a criminal will see a NO GUNS sign and say “well, we can’t shoot him here… damn…” A strong state preemption is needed to keep those that obey the laws safe from radical local government.
      
9. Grant ATF (Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms) the authority to require dealer inventory checks to detect lost and stolen guns. This will require our Congressional delegation to courageously help us, but this change could make a big difference. Dealers are currently required to notify ATF when guns from their inventories have been lost or stolen, but the Tiahrt Amendment prevents ATF from requiring gun dealers to conduct annual physical inventory checks to detect losses and thefts. ATF reports thousands of guns are missing out of gun dealers’ inventories every year. We need to know where these guns are going, if they’ve been stolen, and our Senators and members of Congress can lead this effort.
   
   1. Is this really a problem or is this another liberal “feel good measure?”
      
10. Provide authority to state and local authorities to fully investigate gun dealers and traffickers. Information about guns, whether lost, stolen, or improperly sold, should be made available to everyone, including law enforcement, researchers, and public health organizations. In civil proceedings, state and local law enforcement are restricted from using gun trace data to suspend or revoke the license of gun dealers caught breaking the law. Fixing this will require another federal law change, and will take us in the right direction.
    
    1. So because I sell my guns private party does that make me an arms trafficker?
       
11. Require new handguns to be micro-stamped. Micro-stamping handguns during manufacturing imprints a unique code onto all shell casings when bullets are fired from that gun. It won’t stop a shooting from happening, but if police officers can learn the serial number of the gun used in a crime, they can quickly identify the owner, or at a minimum have a lead from which to start.
    
    1. This has to be the STUPIDEST liberal idea EVER. First of all, micro-stamping can be defeated in less than 2 minutes with a nail file that costs a quarter. Because the stamp will be metal, how hard would it really be to take out the firing pin, hit it twice with a file and put it back in without the micro-stamp. What’s that? Let’s make it ILLEGAL to file it off… I am sure this will work JUST AS WELL as a no gun sign. Yeah, let’s make it illegal. That will stop criminals from doing something that easy!
       
12. Restrict large capacity ammunition magazines. Last year six people were murdered, and 13 others — including U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords — were severely wounded in Tucson. The shooter used a gun capable of holding 33 bullets. These large capacity magazines were previously prohibited under federal law. The federal law expired. This law restricting the capacity of ammunition magazines should be reinstated.
    
    1. This does nothing as there is this pesky reality that one can carry more than one 10 round magazine. One person can carry 10 magazines which means they are carrying 100 rounds of ammo on themselves, and changing out magazines is as easy as pushing a button and putting in a new one. It literally takes 4 seconds. I am sure that banning “large capacity magazines” will stop people from shooting each other.
       
13. Increase penalties for people who sell guns to criminals, violent offenders, and young adults. According to the ATF, a majority of guns used in crimes by people under 24 years of age were purchased by someone else then stolen or sold. Those who sell guns to felons, violent criminals, or youth should be held criminally and civilly liable for the results of their actions. The city should coordinate efforts with the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office to consider which gun laws should be amended and updated.
    
    1. I can agree with this one… Although people 18-24 can legally purchase guns as well… So we just violate their rights because we want to? That makes a ton on sense. But I can agree, if you KNOWINGLY sell a firearm to a convicted felon, then yes we should have harsh penalties.
       
14. Keep loaded guns away from children. This is incredibly obvious, but loaded guns and children should not be in the same place. We don’t need more local tragedies to know this fact. We read about guns in homes and cars being misused way too often. Recently a Marysville, Washington, police officer was charged with second-degree manslaughter after his daughter was shot and killed in their van by a sibling using the officer’s gun. Four kids, under the age of seven, were left alone in the van with a loaded gun. What happened to the trigger lock? Or a separate lock box? I can only begin to imagine the pain, the blame, and the devastation to that family.
    
    1. While doing this we should also ban anyone under 18 from ever eating McDonald’s. Because we MUST THINK OF THE CHILDREN! I carry a loaded firearm in my home, which is my right. Should I be required to disarm when my niece comes over? I can agree that leaving loaded weapons lying around with kids around is a dumb-ass move. That police officer will have to live with his decision and the legal ramification the rest of his life. He was a moron for doing what he did. But the only way to really enforce this would be “mandatory government checks” and I don’t know about you, but no one is coming in my house to check.
       
15. Anti-bullying programs for girls and boys beginning early and continuing through the teen years should be incorporated in every school. School safety requires effective anti-bullying programs. Some measure of security, including surveillance magnetometers and additional security officers, may be necessary in some schools some of the time, but none of these things will guarantee students’ safety against determined shooters, such as those responsible for the deaths at Columbine or Virginia Tech. We know these shooters were loners, troubled, and mocked. The same is said to have been true about the Cafe Racer murderer.  Had they been identified earlier by their peers or teachers, some form of care and intervention may have saved lives.
    
    1. Here is another one I can agree with. Kids are mean, and can be ruthless to one another. Some kids cannot take it and will seek out other means to settling their problems or even commit suicide. But this is not a GUN problem; this is a social problem because it has become socially acceptable to bully people.
16. Focus on the root causes of poverty and hopelessness. We fund many good programs available in our city to keep kids in school and help them attain skills to get jobs; we have programs to help those who are troubled stay on their medications; we have programs to help felons return from prison and find housing and employment. We must continue to fund the programs that work. By cutting corners and defunding the critical programs, we may just be cutting lives short. That is an expense we cannot afford.
    
    1. Yes, I am sure that the problem is easily solved by more reliance on government. What people need is to get up off their asses and go do something about it instead of sitting around waiting for the government to fix their problems.

King5 is now running what they call an exclusive on where Ian Stawicki purchased his firearms.  What is is scary about this is that is the same thing they did after the beltway sniper back in Washington DC.  If someone lawfully purchases something what they do with it from there is not business of the establishment that sold it to them.  I don’t hear the news doing and expose when there is a car accident at the dealership that sold the car.  It’s the same mentality as blaming McDonald’s for making you fat because they sold you the food.

Bull's Eye in Tacoma, WA where Ian Stawicki allegedly purchased the firearms used in the May 30th shooting at Cafe Racer in Seattle, WA.

What is not being covered is the personal responsibility.  When will we start blaming the individual for their actions and not objects that were used?  The ONLY object out there that is ever blamed for anything is guns.  When there is a horrific car crash, the driver is to blame unless there is a massive failure.  When there is a stabbing the assailant is to blame.  When there is a shooting, the gun is to blame…??!?  There seems to be a large disparity here.

Start holding people accountable for their actions and not the inanimate objects that they use to commit the crime, because without an operator the gun is nothing more than several pieces of metal.  The act takes intent, malice and most of all hate to commit.  Just because there is a gun involved, it is not the fault of the gun.  Ian Stawicki chose to do this, mental health problems or not, he convinced himself what he was doing was right.  The only way to fix that is to fix our broken mental health system that allows people with obvious mental problems to remain on the streets instead of getting them the help they need.

This weekend was no doubt a bloody one in Western Washington. With seven shooting over the long weekend we are now at 16 homicides for Seattle this year. This has shaped up to be the bloodiest weekend in Seattle since 2008. There are two common trends here, one is that people are being shot and the second is that every one of these shootings now appears gang related. Not surprising since a recent report has the number of gang members in King County alone at almost 10,000. Seattle Police cut their gang unit back to almost nothing a number of years ago, and we are now beginning to feel the ramifications of that. So what was the answer this weekend? Increase the number of police on the streets in what Seattle Police called “problem areas.” The problem is the whole city is a problem area at this point. To start the weekend off there was a shooting in the Madrona neighborhood where a father of two was killed in front of his two kids and his parents while waiting at an intersection. There was a shooting at the Northwest Folklife festival where an (alleged) gang member fired on another (alleged) gang member missing him entirely and hitting a bystander a block away. On Saturday night there was a total of five drive by shootings where police estimate a total of 60-70 rounds were fired. In North Seattle there was a home invasion where a homeowner confronted the intruder and was shot in the chest and later died. While that shooting is thought to be related to the homeowners illegal marijuana grow, it still illustrates the amount of violence that intruders are willing to take when confronted inside a home.

     So what gives here? Well Seattle has a gang problem, and anyone who denies that is high on something. Seattle Police have confirmed two of the drive by shootings were gang related, and the other two are “being looked at” as possibly gang related, however that works. So where does this leave the firearms community and gun rights advocates? Well it leaves us in a quandary over what the proper steps are to reduce the violence. There is not a gun rights advocate out there that will condone any of the violence that has happened this weekend. Even though I stand for everyone to have the right to own and carry a firearm, I do not stand for what has happened this weekend. This is not what freedom looks like, and it is not what the second amendment is about. Most, if not all, people that carry for self-defense are peace loving people. Speaking for myself only, I want nothing more than to be able to go though my day and not be bothered. But I carry a firearm because I know the reality is that crime and violence is everywhere and it is a tool that can help me. Violent acts can happen at home, at the store, in a parking lot or even on a street corner.

What actually worries me the most about this though is the politicians and anti-gun groups out there that will use this to take away the guns of the law abiding in an effort to feel better and think that they are making an impact. They will disarm me and everyone else that will follow the law and leave us defenseless against thugs and criminals. I will point out that there were probably more than one law broken in each of these incidents that could have totally prevented the incident in the first place. But there is one person that is not taking the anti-gun approach to this (or on the surface doesn’t seem to be) is David Rose, a Q13 anchor and Executive Producer for Washington’s Most Wanted, is working with Seattle Police on a program called Stop Our Shootings. This program aims to solve cold case gang murders and stop gang violence. Mr. Rose is not blaming the gun, but the criminal behind it and for that I wholeheartedly applaud him. In a liberal city like Seattle there tends to be backlash when this like this happen. If a dozen people are killed or injured in elevators, let’s more heavily regulate elevators! If there are seven shootings in a weekend guns must be the problem. The problem with that thinking is that gun violence is more than a missed inspection on an elevator. It is a willful act that someone is taking out a gun to do someone harm with, there is malice in the intent. If that someone happens to be a lawfully armed citizen, then at least they have the means to fight back against the spreading violence.

I wish Seattle Police, David Rose, Stop Our Shootings (S.O.S.) and The Silent War the best of luck. I truly do because at least they are blaming the problem on the source and not the tools used, at least for now. The will need it, and I am sure that Seattle Police know they are behind the eight-ball on this one and catching back up to the gangs is going to be a long hard fight and there will be more bloodshed before there is any sort of resolution.