Mugme street news

This came out just before Boomershoot and I set it aside for when I had more time. That time has come.

I have frequently posted about what Barb named “Mugme street” in downtown Seattle. In case you ever had any doubt as to the validity of claims of this being a “bad part of town” we now have this news:

SPD, FBI Target 3rd and Pine Drug Market In Operation Crosstown Traffic

A four-month operation by the Seattle Police Department’s Major Crimes Taskforce (MCTF) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation has led authorities to 186 suspected drug dealers and thieves, who turned Seattle’s downtown core into an open-air drug market and street corner swap meet. As of Thursday morning, police have arrested 95 suspects, and local officials are now working to get some of those dealers off the streets by connecting them with a pioneering and promising diversion program, instead of sending them to prison.

Since January, MCTF detectives and West Precinct officers have been working undercover as part of Operation Crosstown Traffic, a partnership with the FBI, US Attorney’s Office, King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office and City Attorney’s Office, aimed at identifying criminals involved in a thriving underground economy around 3rd Avenue and Pine Street. Over the last year, police have received 10,000 calls of service in the area surrounding the 1500 block of Pine Street, including frequent reports of drug dealing and property crimes, as well as violent brawls, shootings, and stabbings.

Detectives also got a good look at the area’s underground economy in action, as shoplifters sold armloads of stolen goods—like Seahawks jerseys, sunglasses and even bottles of shampoo—to crowds at bus stops and on street corners. Shoplifters took the cash from those sales, detectives say, and went straight to area drugs dealers, before heading to nearby alleyways to shoot up or smoke narcotics.

Ry and I used to work in the Century Square building. It was a very nice building on the inside and on 4th street, but one side of that building was on 3rd street from Pike to Pine. We are both glad to have escaped from there.

Seattle is extremely hostile to gun ownership and even though you can legally carry a gun on the bus and on the streets company (California based) rules didn’t allow us to carry into the office.

Quote of the day—Art Burr

There was a time when gun ownership made some sense, when people needed them to provide food or protection for themselves and their families or for the common defense. Such needs do not exist today.

It is time to grow up, put away our macho toys and recognize that the ready availability of guns is the problem and not the solution – to anything.

Art Burr
May 20, 2015
There’s no need for guns anymore
[Via email from Bob, 3 Boxes of BS.

Don’t let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Barb and Joe’s unexpected adventure

It started out with a mistake on my part. I got a call from Bloodworks Northwest on Tuesday asking me to donate blood. I made an appointment for the following evening and a couple minutes after I got off the phone I remembered Barb and I were going to go hiking on Mount Rainer over the weekend. Rats! I’m going to be hiking up mountains at high altitudes while a pint low on blood. It figures. I did the same thing when we went to Yosemite a couple years ago. Continue reading

Quote of the day—Paul O’Brien

A simple repeal of the 2nd amendment coupled with a replacement that clearly states what you can and cannot have access to (i.e. MAYBE a single manual hunting rifle or shotgun), plus a government buyback of existing guns and ammo, should do the trick over time.

But it MUST start with putting the gun manufacturers out of business. They need to be shut down immediately.

Paul O’Brien
May 21, 2015
Comment to John Traphagan: When will we examine our heavily armed culture?
[H/T to Hazmat who sent me an email about something else contained here.

Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.

This guy has total crap for brains.

A “simple repeal of the 2nd Amendment”? No such thing is possible.

Roughly 300 million guns, plus ammo, at market value would be roughly $300 billion dollars assuming everyone politely brought them to the local collection point. Add in the cost of those who would turn in their guns only when they were out of ammo and I expect the cost would be an order, or two, of magnitude larger.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brandon Smith

Each citizen is his first and best line of defense.

Only when the American people take on the philosophy of self-defense rather than government reliance will we be free of fear from terrorism and free of fear from tyrannical government. It starts with each of you, in your homes, neighborhoods, towns and counties. Citizen organizations for mutual aid and security to counter any threat, regardless of the mask it wears, will be the catalyst for a legitimately free society. In the face of such organization, martial law is not only illegitimate, but entirely unnecessary. ISIS does not matter. It is what we ultimately do about ISIS or similar threats that matters…

Brandon Smith
May 20, 2015
Is Martial Law Justified If ISIS Attacks?
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jody Powell

As much as I hate to say it, the NRA is effective primarily because it is largely right when it claims that most gun control laws inconvenience and threaten the law-abiding while having little or no impact on violent crime or criminals.

Jody Powell
Former President Carter press aide
January 1994
George Stephanopoulos sought gun control debate in Bill Clinton administration
[H/T David Hardy.

Gun rights advocates have been saying this for at least five decades. The Clinton administration knew this over two decades ago. If you listened carefully to the anti-gun politicians and even most of the leaders of the anti-gun organizations you would find they use evasive wording when they talk about gun control. It was, and still is, very clear they know gun control doesn’t and can’t reduce violent crime. I’m certain the Obama administration knows this as well.

So what is the real reason they advocate for gun control?

Whatever the answer is, it can’t be good.—Joe]

Overkill

Execution By Anti-Aircraft Gun: The Photographic Evidence.

Six ZPU-4s were used. Each is composed of four 14mm heavy machine guns. That’s 24 machine guns with each roughly equivalent to a M-2 .50 BMG.

The crime was napping while at an event with the Supreme Leader.

I wonder what the penalty would be for suggesting “rule by despot is a bad idea”.

Quote of the day—J-

Glockheads are heathens, following a false prophet. Real Americans worship at the Church of John Moses Browning.

Follow not the unbelievers. Heed not the basement dwellers, mall ninjas, and armchair commandos. Do not anoint thy hip with Kydex and polymer.

J-
May 13, 2015
Comment to The New Austro-American Jihad.
[It’s a very well done rant and rave.

Via email from Michael B.—Joe]

Repeat an Insights class for 30% off

I’ve been thinking about doing this anyway:

Memorial Day Sale May 20-26

Repeat any class June through August and get 30% off! Because once just isn’t enough.

Call Jenna at 888-958-0884 or email info@InSightsTraining.com to sign up. This offer does not include Tactical First Aid or Shooting Leagues and may not be combined with any other discounts. This is for repeat classes — you must have taken the class previously.

Visit InSightsTraining.com and find a class that fits your schedule. Stay safe and we’ll see you in class!

Maybe now is the time to go through one of the classes I took nearly 20 years ago. I’m thinking maybe Intensive Handgun Skills.

Quote of the day—Bear Brian

This is crap. Grow some balls and ban them outright. This accomplishes nothing.

Bear Brian
May 18, 2015
Comment to Obama to Ban Military-Style Assault Weapons For Local Police Forces
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Yellow journalism everywhere

H/T to Firehand for this “article” which says:

Well, this should surprise exactly no one. Not even a little. Ever since the NRA created the “grassroots” movement to shove “open carry” laws down America’s throat, white men have been parading their penis extensions to shopping malls and restaurants to bully and terrorize people. Oh wait, I meant “show their patriotism.” No, hold on, I actually did mean “bully and terrorize.”

Meanwhile, gun control advocates have been pointing out that the second black men started to do the same, white conservatives would go into full panic mode. And just as predicted, when the New Black Panther Party did just that, the right wing started to hyperventilate

But this is nothing new. Conservatives love love LOVE the Second Amendment right up until the point where black people start exercising it. Hell, the NRA and even Saint Ronnie were so terrified of black men with guns that they crafted and passed laws in the 60’s that explicitly prohibited the kind of open carry that ammosexuals are currently using to terrorize their neighbors.

They made reference to, but didn’t provide the link, to this “article” which has this to say:

Ah, finally. A gun club President Barack Obama can support.

The New Black Panther Party has been suspiciously silent since their unfortunate part in the Ferguson debacle. Thankfully, for those of you following the zany antics of Eric Holder’s favorite group of  militants, they’ve popped up again.

We accept all oppressed people of color with weapons,” Darren X told Vice. “The complete agenda involves going into our communities and educating our people on federal, state and local gun laws. We want to stop fratricide, genocide — all the ‘cides.”

Given its frontier reputation, Texas is surprisingly one of the few states that doesn’t allow concealed carry. However, it does allow the open carry of firearms, which the group uses to an alarming effect.

It’s good to see that while the gun rights of average Americans are under assault from the Obama administration, these guys don’t even get the slightest bit of attention.

Now I understand why they didn’t provide the link. The author of the first article greatly exaggerates what the second article says. I didn’t see any “panic” or “hyperventilating” in the second article. Yes, there was some hyperbola. Both articles engaged in sensationalism worthy of second page placement in the National Enquirer. There was a tantalizing bit of truth in each and the rest was forgettable.

If the anti-gun author had wanted to show gun rights people were against blacks keeping and bearing arms then they should have quoted a NRA, SAF, GOA, or JPFO or even a gun blog source saying something to that effect. They didn’t because they don’t exist.

They claim in the 1960s the NRA was against blacks bearing arms. I don’t know the extent of their consent for the California anti-carry laws at the time but there was a NRA revolution in the mid-1970s that purged a lot of those type of people. And apparently the author didn’t know (I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt, it could be because it didn’t fit their agenda) about the black civil rights groups that formed NRA gun clubs so they could get training and cheap CMP guns for defense against the Klan. See Negros with Guns and The Deacons for Defense: Armed Resistance and the Civil Rights Movement for more information along those lines.

And, of course, the anti-gun author apparently recognized,essentially before they started, their straw man attack they would have to invoke Markley’s Law. It’s the best they can come up with so they led with their “strongest” point.

So that is why!

I’m pretty sure Janelle and Barron told me at least the gist of what they were going to do. But my mind is running close to overload during Boomershoot and since their plans didn’t have much to do with running the event they got filtered.

I had been I wondering why in this picture Janelle was facing away from the fireball:

IMG_2696Adjusted

After finding this picture on Facebook I was able to reassemble the memory fragments:

JanelleBabyFireball

Well done!

Quote of the day—Frederick J. Scullin, Jr.

The fact that an individual may be able to demonstrate a greater need for self-protection, and therefore meets the “good reason”/”proper reason” requirement, does not indicate, in any way, whether that person is less likely to misuse handguns or may be less dangerous. See Drake, 724 F.3d at 454 (Hardiman, C.J., dissenting).12 Nor does the District of Columbia’s “good reason”/”proper reason” requirement make it less likely that those who meet this requirement will accidently shoot themselves or others or engage in criminal activity than those who cannot meet this requirement. See id. The fact that a person may have a greater need for self-protection says nothing about how limiting the carrying of handguns to such individuals would result in a reduction of risk to other members of the public or reduce violent crime. Is the Court to conclude that people who do not have a heightened need for self-protection are more likely to commit violent crimes?

Frederick J. Scullin, Jr.
May 18, 2015
BRIAN WRENN, JOSHUA AKERY,
TYLER WHIDBY, and SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA and CATHY L. LANIER,
Defendants

[H/T Firearm Policy Coalistion (BREAKING: Washington, D.C. “May Issue” Handgun Carry License Law is Unconstitutional, Rules Federal Court Today).

The decision as a whole says “may issue” carry is probably unconstitutional and pending the actual ruling a preliminary injunction is granted against the highly restrictive D.C. “may issue” law. There are other jurisdictions that are going to have to take notice soon!

Others will have a lot more to say about what this means and the likely response of D.C. See for example see what Sebastian has to say about this ruling. But I really wanted to point out is that in the last sentence I quoted above judge is calling the anti-gun people out on merely making “reasoning sounds” rather than a logical argument. He’s mocking them!

I especially like the part where the court agrees the plaintiffs should post a bond to cover the costs if the preliminary injunction was improperly granted. The plaintiff have to put up a bond of $1000.00. I regard that as a slap in the face for the tyrants of D.C.—Joe]

Overheard

Text messages from yesterday:

Barb: Drive safely. You must be tired. I would guess we’re staying home tonight?

Joe: I don’t feel tired or sleepy. But cognitive function is diminished. Wait and see?

Barb: Ok! Can you let me know what you’re thinking before you get home? I need to shower.

Joe: Okay.

Barb: I’ll bet your cute with impaired cognitive function. Winking smile

I didn’t find anything cute about it but she confirmed, at least to herself, I was “cute” when I made it home and tried talking to her.