Gun LOL: Seattle Cops Get Pwned

23388 559918130687288 409060893 n
Pwned

Nothing gives me an eye roll quite as much as hearing the phrase "gun culture" applied to America. Alls I can't figure out is which is dominant. Is it the "gun culture," "big-car culture," The "drive-in, diners & dives culture," or something else altogether?

Or, do all these sub-cultures simply have a common thread running through them, manifest when people are so messily left to their own proclivities to pursue their own values for they own sakes?

Seattle Gun BuyBack Get’s JACKED! Turns Into a Damn Gun Show! LOL

Police officers in Seattle, Washington held their first gun buyback program in 20 years this weekend, underneath interstate 5,  and soon found that private gun collectors were working the large crowd as little makeshift gun shows began dotting the parking lot and sidewalks. Some even had “cash for guns” signs prominently displayed.

Police stood in awe as gun enthusiasts and collectors waved wads of cash for the guns being held by those standing in line for the buyback program.

People that had arrived to trade in their weapons for $100 or $200 BuyBack gift cards ($100 for handguns, shotguns and rifles, and $200 for assault weapons) soon realized that gun collectors were there and paying top dollar for collectible firearms. So, as the line for the chump cards got longer and longer people began to jump ship and head over to the dealers.

That's just all sorts of in-your-fucking-face wonderful, giving me a needed laf and a moral high-five all in one, on a Monday morning.

John Diaz, Seattles Police Chief,  wasn’t pleased with the turn of events stating “I’d prefer they wouldn’t sell them,” but admitted it’s perfectly legal for private individuals to buy and sell guns, FOR NOW. Mayor Mike McGinn said at a news conference the private transactions are a loophole that needs to be closed. “There’s no background checks, and some (guns) could be exchanged on the streets that shouldn’t be in circulation.”

But Schuyler Taylor, a previous gun retailer attending the event in hopes of buying weapons, asked “Why not offer them cash versus a gift card? I’m still taking the guns off the streets; they’re just going in my safe.”

Ah, but that's an easy question to answer. Lefties and commies love guns. They just want them exclusively in the hands of an elite cadre of professionals. They want them monopolized. 911 is your "equalizer," but most importantly, it greases the wheel of state dominance—to which the bitches have devoted their lives, taking great care to stay on the right side of their "alpha male."

People were reportedly, at one point, jumping out of vehicles  whilst sitting in traffic – making on the spot deals with the gun buyers.

But the BuyBack wasn’t a bust. On the contrary – their $80,000 supply of gift cards didn’t last but 2 hours, and by 11:00 am they began attempting to issue IOU’s at which point the entire crowd responded by turning and marching toward the gun dealers, forcing the police officers to pack it up for the day.

Ha, imagine the scene. There's a metaphor for impotence for ya. This whole dumb buy-back deal is always touted in at least some tinge of moral underpinning—people coming to Jesus, getting right with God yada yada bla bla bla.

It's nothing of the sort. It's a market, just like anything else. Chances are many of those people got a gun in trade for sex, drugs, rock & roll or a water pump replacement. And it just sat there until they get a gift certificate to go play at Ronald McDonald's for an afternoon, and a meal to boot.

On one last note of hilarity, the Seattle Police department claims that they will check the buyback guns to see if any were previously stolen and, if so, try to return them to the rightful owners! LOL. Brilliant!

Actually, that would be a "brilliant" exercise of police work. See, rather than actually do something about real crime (instead of raising revenue from people committing traffic infractions), they could set up a market to incentivize the theft of guns. Have a buy back program every weekend. "Go to work, Monday - Friday, steal as many guns as you can; we'll give you $100-200 for each, no questions asked, and we don't have to get our hands dirty."

In economics terms, it's all just "transfers," anyway.

In 1992, Seattle police collected more than 1,200 guns in a four-day buyback program.

Now the only question is, when will the Seattle Police department stage the next gun show?

Yea, 20 years is a long time. Clearly, that buy-back-gun-show-program did nothing to rid Seattle of gun crimes in the ensuing 20 years. Clearly, they need to have gun shows and fence-for-thieves operations more often.

Laf.

Comments

  1. Gordon Shannon says:

    “private transactions are a loophole that needs to be closed”

    *face-palm*

    The individual is a loophole that needs to be closed.

    • Well, sure, just like the drug trade. Drugs are bigger, more popular, more widely used than ever.

      Who’s the world’s largest drug pusher? GovCo.

      The lefties and commies love it that way. They love guns and they love drugs. They just want drug monopolies enforced by gun monopolies.

  2. I usually can “see the other side” when it comes to opposing points of view, but this I’ve never understood, what in the world is the rationale for these buy-backs?
    .
    I mean, these people don’t make sense even within their own mind-set :
    If the idea is to reduce guns, buy-back is ineffective right off the bat by being a drop in the ocean since there’s Hundreds of Millions of guns in private hands.
    Not to mention the obvious fencing for illegal guns that you point out, or the retiring of old or damaged weapons so people can put the money towards buying better ones.
    .
    Then there’s the elephant in the room, gun shows and private sales. No gun control measures can make any sense Even to gun control advocates when there’s an easy way to get guns without background checks.
    That knife actually cuts both ways, it’s an issue that ‘gun supporters’ grapple with too, because how can they advocate for a gun in the hands of every ‘responsible’, ‘honest’ , ‘capable’ citizen when there is no way to check who is buying guns at private sales/gun shows.
    .
    So in fact, the arguments on Both sides of the gun control debate don’t make sense.
    .
    I’ve been punching holes in them for months with the salutary effect of being usually misunderstood across the board. Surely there are others that see the whole issue as irrational? I’m still hoping that on this site there may be some.
    .
    Instead, in the general media and from ‘groups’ and governments, there’s a lot of noise and hoopla over assault weapons, for which there isn’t even an agreed definition, and high capacity magazines – um, how high is high?
    .
    While on the ‘other side’ the equally fervent preaching continues to center around sound bites of ‘honest’ citizens having the right to protect themselves and ‘responsible’ and ‘trained’ gun carriers protecting, why, all of us…even if permit rules (which usually include training requirements) have been relaxed and continue to be relaxed across many states and there’s that huge loop-hole of private sales/gun shows so that all in all, there isn’t’ even a Rudimentary Idea of any gun owner’s honesty, responsibility or training level for that matter.
    .
    It just seems to me that no aspect of the gun control ‘measures’ being proposed make any sense, whether one agrees with the overarching principle of gun control (less guns, less gun deaths) or not.
    Yet, everyone is still arguing about the principle, citing all kinds of statistics which frankly are a wash because both ‘sides’ can find ones to support their ideas and discount as faulty the ones that don’t, while the whole time the reality of the situation in this country is soundly ignored. Hundreds of millions of guns and possibly up to half of gun sales without any background checks.
    .
    Even if someone hates the idea of ‘the wild west’, the reality is what it is. No matter what government does at this point is Not going to make a difference. Whether it would or wouldn’t in another country or another time is a irrelevant. So is the personal preference towards ‘law and order’ versus ‘limited government/libertarianism’ (or any “-ism”) and versus anarchy.
    .
    Given the reality of the situation, the only thing any individual can do is try to take care of themselves and their loved ones…in Whatever way they want to do that!
    Get themselves training and take advantage of their state gun carry laws if that makes sense to them, or get together with their community and pay for police or marshals in schools and public places (and not one lone ‘resource officer’, for crying out loud) or get barricade systems for their homes and schools or a combination of approaches or….To each his own, and the best solutions are going to vary widely locally, given the variety of logistics and cultures across the whole country.
    This Happens to agree with the overarching principle of anarchy itself, but so what, the philosophy isn’t the Immediate reason to behave this way in this circumstance, the simple reality is the reason, it leaves no choice. Does anyone think this reality can be changed? Peacefully?
    .
    I don’t’ know, am I wrong? Please do argue with me, I’m not neither happy nor unhappy with my conclusions and always looking to learn.

    • “I mean, these people don’t make sense even within their own mind-set :
      If the idea is to reduce guns, buy-back is ineffective right off the bat by being a drop in the ocean since there’s Hundreds of Millions of guns in private hands.”

      Fodder for the morons. makes them feel comfy and safe. Because FEELING is everything. Myself, I think masturbation cornered the market on that forever ago, but you know, it’s not exactly a social activity…. :)

      “That knife actually cuts both ways, it’s an issue that ‘gun supporters’ grapple with too, because how can they advocate for a gun in the hands of every ‘responsible’, ‘honest’ , ‘capable’ citizen when there is no way to check who is buying guns at private sales/gun shows.”

      Simple solution gun advocates realized a long time ago: way more guns in the hands of good people, more often, more places, out in the open. That’s pretty much the only _rational_ solution that contemplates reality, and short of making the whole population pussy bitches, like they are in Europe and Australia, we have a slight edge because of the 2nd amendment and the fact the the Supremes have found it to be a _personal_ right.

      Suck it, pussies.

      “I’ve been punching holes in them for months”

      Sorry, I hadn’t noticed.

      “Surely there are others that see the whole issue as irrational?”

      Irrational is showing up with a fucking daisy to a gun fight. Kumbaya.

      I just want more guns. Everywhere. All the time. Wild west. People become stupid pussies, otherwise. Guns around gets attention. I want people to have presence of mind attention. Friend or foe? Protector or assailant.

      Nothing short of people thinking for themselves every fucking second of every fucking day is satisfactory. Every person in the world who believes themselves protected by cops is delusional, and this is why we live in a crowd-sourced delusion of masturbation that doesn’t really march the real thing.

      Alright, far as I got so far….

      • “Not exactly social activity” – Well now, a little imagination please, it Could be a social activity ;)
        .
        Why bother presenting an argument about whether the ‘wild west’ is actually the preferable situation? We don’t disagree on the end result, it just sounds like you want it to become the wild west and I’m saying it already is – leads to same result, the only reaction to the Reality is for everyone to be aware and to take care of themselves in whichever manner is most effective for them (some people for example will never be able to handle a gun and they know it).

      • I can’t find where I said “not exactly social activity.” And no wonder, because I would not say that. Everything done amongst others is social activity.

        I don’t want for anything but for humans to stop trying to have others pay their way and look out for them.

        Is that perfectly clear enough? I think that if everyone had a gun strapped, then my ideal would be achieved far sooner.

        And no, I don’t give the slightest shit about any worries. I suspect it would result in far less crime, but that’s unproven.

        Here’s one thing I’ve always said: if freedom was the most impractical idea that got the most people killed, I’d still advocate it.

      • Oh dear, my teasing gone flat. I was referring to your :”Myself, I think masturbation cornered the market on that forever ago, but you know, it’s not exactly a social activity… :)
        .
        Yes, I see what you mean. I don’t have any worries either, but not due to any ideals, rather because the situation is set in this country, there is no viable option to reduce guns in this reality so there is no point in arguing over the unproven. My contention has been that when people do argue about it, on either side of this debate, they fall into self-contradictory arguments in order to come up with Prescriptions based on Conjectures leading to… ‘social engineering’ – cringe.
        I agree of course with your last statement, as I suspect did all those who fought for freedom over the centuries. It is self-consistent and it goes way back, to your favorite ancient civilization : ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς. :)

  3. Economics is racist, sexist, homophobic and right-wing. Be compassionate you reich-winger!

  4. This is really pleasing for me to read until … “but admitted it’s perfectly legal for private individuals to buy and sell guns, FOR NOW” and then I realize how many pussies there are in the states and how many want just that. In this case, you can’t even will your children your weapons.

    We have been living such a dreamy life that, for most, we do not have to think to live. Very sad, since I believe this thin veneer could end at any given moment, like when you cross a street into a group of thugs just waiting for the perfect sucker.

    And, Marie, I’ll take the Wild Wild West any day over just about any other alternative. Do you think that time was just about OK Corral shoot-outs? No, I see it as a wild land with wild animals and you had to live wildly to survive. It made people smart, fit, aware of their surroundings at all times…what do we have now? Kids with their noses 10″ from their phone texting meaningless shit.

  5. Richard, whether wild west or wild, wet and wonderful, Happy Birthday, mon vieux! :)
    Always living closer to the heart : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quBCjo2rUZg

  6. SteamboatOperator says:

    Shouldn’t the government be focusing more on a kitchen knife buyback program? Or a bludgeoning tools buyback program? Can’t have all those excess baseball bats and tire irons just laying around readily available for anyone to pick up and bash little bobby’s head in.

  7. Dr. Curmudgeon Gee says:

    XD. this is funny

    reminds me of another irrelevant news.
    in a small town in Spain, an owner of theatre decides to sell carrots to avoid the sales tax hike on tickets.

  8. Hey Richard,
    Not sure where to put this — but I wanted to add it to the gun control/gun rights discussion — from a very interesting multi-part essay here: http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/touching-the-raw-amygdala-an-analysis-of-liberal-debate-tactics-preface/
    =====================

    Now imagine a Liberal supporting a ban upon firearms. Here, a typical Conservative will respond with a plethora of statistics such as preseted by John Lott in his book “More Guns, Less Crime,” all in seeking to point out the stupidity of the Liberal position. Liberals will respond with an attempt at out-grouping, seeking to portray the Conservative as someone who is about to get everyone killed for a desire to engage in a shooting hobby.

    Here, I would play off the Liberal’s cowardice, and disloyalty. K-types are programmed to be repulsed by both qualities, and seek to eliminate such individuals from their group. My argument would go like this.

    “I can’t grasp how you could support a ban on firearms. Personally, I cannot understand why you would not want to own a firearm, yourself. To me, the most fundamental responsibility of a man is to protect his wife and children, at all costs. I could not imagine rendering myself helpless — wholly unable to protect my wife and child, in the event of some form of trouble. Truthfully, I am aghast you would willingly allow yourself to be so remiss in your duty to protect your family. I can’t believe you would leave your wife and child vulnerable, due to your own cowardice with respect to firearms.”

    “Of course, you have every right to do so. But what is really galling, is that not only are you content to be remiss in your own responsibilities to protect your wife and child, you expect to be able to make others be similarly disloyal cowards, remiss in their responsibilities to their own wives and children. You demand the right to make all of us be remiss in our duties to protect our families, all because guns scare you. That is true gall.”

    This is an example of how an argument which could be cold and logical, and wholly unaffecting to a Liberal’s amygdala, can be turned emotional, converted into a clear attempt at out-grouping, and then used to shock the Liberal into a Mike Wallace-like state. Notice, it focuses upon the emotional response to seeing such a coward, and how the crowd should feel in being forced by such a coward to exhibit cowardice themselves. You need to actually use such an argument on a Liberal, to see how different the effect is from simply presenting facts to them.

    It is easy to formulate these types of emotional out-grouping arguments yourself, since the in-group is the K-type human population, while the Liberal, by virtue of their Liberal ethos, espouses innately r-type mores and virtues, which the populace is programmed to be repulsed by. All of which says nothing of the repulsion a K-type crowd will feel at being forced to exhibit r-type mores and behaviors themselves, which is the standard Liberal modus operandi.

    Where the K-type populace values loyalty, the r-type Liberal will be disloyal, from immigration, to war, to sovereignty, to foreign policy, to intelligence, etc. Where the K-type human wants to protect children, and see children reared carefully, the r-type Liberal supports single parenting, gay parenting, and all other sorts of unconventional parenting schemes, with no concern at all for their effects upon the children. Where the K-type human wants freedom, thirsts for competition, respects success, and demands responsibility, the Liberal seeks to thwart all of that. Where the K-type human respects ability, determination, and effort, and demands that it be rewarded, the r-type seeks to reward failure, sloth, and cowardice, and force the successful to endure the cost of producing the reward. Where the K-type human wants to win, the r-type seeks to prevent it.

    =====================

    Just read the essay, haven’t read his links yet, but it’s an interesting idea: affecting the amygdala of the liberal to positive effect.

    • I think the anon conservative misunderstands his opponents. I vigorously disagree with the following notion, but most of the liberals I have heard speak “know” that guns are inherently dangerous. They “know” that if they had a gun, it would be MUCH more likely to kill a member of their family than be used in defense of same. They are, in fact, so confident in this false knowledge that there is NO convincing them otherwise. You can no more convince a liberal that he is a coward than you can convince him that poor people really could take care of themselves without his help.

      AnonCon sounds like kind of a jackass & I think his K & r types are horseshit.

    • People Should go see Side Effects, in a theater near them. Guns are merely a modern weapon. Killing someone relies principally on the decision to kill them, not the means.

Trackbacks

Speak Your Mind

*