Gun dealer allegedly allowed a civilian (security guard, employed by a public institution, paid by the Sheriff's Department) to buy firearms and ammunition magazines using an exemption meant for police officers".
Oh horrors. The City of Los Angeles has the complete vapours over this. I guess even the Only Ones aren't exclusive enough to own guns there. Especially if it's in an ugly building blighting up "an up-and-coming business district trying to rebuild its reputation as a hub of African American arts and culture." that is "poised for revival, with a new Metro stop". (Seriously, is that anything like "he was just starting to get his life back together after prison"?).
And remember, the "improper sale" that could cause him to "face as much as a year and a half in county jail and up to $1,000 in fines" is because he gave her "an exemption that should only be available to sworn law enforcement personnel." This is because even though "Suarez was employed by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to serve West Los Angeles College as a security officer, she was working at the department as a civilian and was not a sworn officer."
"{C}ity lawyers said the charges were rare and serious." So serious that it's only a city ordinance. "Under city rules, Suarez shouldn’t have been allowed to buy more than one handgun within a 30-day period" because you can't do any damage with just one.
I mean, obviously, you wouldn't want "an online retailer of police and military equipment" operating "a cluster of warehouses" in "a community that had suffered high rates of gun violence" (but is simultaneously up and coming with a new metro stop) even though "its facilities are not open to the general public, only to active law enforcement or military personnel." {/sarcasm}
We certainly wouldn't want any local jobs interfering with building a reputation for arts and culture. (I started to cut and paste, but I'm deliberately making a distinction in not using the "African American Arts and Culture quote because A: I don't care what kind of arts & culture you're trying to promote; you don't accomplish it by excluding businesses from your community and B: I will just be accused that jab being about African Americans being lazy or having a lack of culture. As a white male, there's no winning that victim-claiming game for me, even with a black fiancee.)
And I never realized that lack of an attractive building facade was a reason to unconstitutionally bar a person from their right to free assembly and to conduct legitimate, legal business in your(their) neighborhood, especially a business which is an enabler of basic civil rights. We are probably not encouraged to speculate that "blocked windows and barren walls" may be that way to discourage crime in an "up and coming neighborhood" that had "suffered high rates of gun violence" in the recent past.
Folks, these are the kinds of barriers to small business, especially local gun stores, that are reducing consumer choice in your neighborhoods while even marijuana stores are increasingly hanging up their shingles all over the place. Don't stand for it.
Oh horrors. The City of Los Angeles has the complete vapours over this. I guess even the Only Ones aren't exclusive enough to own guns there. Especially if it's in an ugly building blighting up "an up-and-coming business district trying to rebuild its reputation as a hub of African American arts and culture." that is "poised for revival, with a new Metro stop". (Seriously, is that anything like "he was just starting to get his life back together after prison"?).
And remember, the "improper sale" that could cause him to "face as much as a year and a half in county jail and up to $1,000 in fines" is because he gave her "an exemption that should only be available to sworn law enforcement personnel." This is because even though "Suarez was employed by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to serve West Los Angeles College as a security officer, she was working at the department as a civilian and was not a sworn officer."
"{C}ity lawyers said the charges were rare and serious." So serious that it's only a city ordinance. "Under city rules, Suarez shouldn’t have been allowed to buy more than one handgun within a 30-day period" because you can't do any damage with just one.
I mean, obviously, you wouldn't want "an online retailer of police and military equipment" operating "a cluster of warehouses" in "a community that had suffered high rates of gun violence" (but is simultaneously up and coming with a new metro stop) even though "its facilities are not open to the general public, only to active law enforcement or military personnel." {/sarcasm}
We certainly wouldn't want any local jobs interfering with building a reputation for arts and culture. (I started to cut and paste, but I'm deliberately making a distinction in not using the "African American Arts and Culture quote because A: I don't care what kind of arts & culture you're trying to promote; you don't accomplish it by excluding businesses from your community and B: I will just be accused that jab being about African Americans being lazy or having a lack of culture. As a white male, there's no winning that victim-claiming game for me, even with a black fiancee.)
And I never realized that lack of an attractive building facade was a reason to unconstitutionally bar a person from their right to free assembly and to conduct legitimate, legal business in your(their) neighborhood, especially a business which is an enabler of basic civil rights. We are probably not encouraged to speculate that "blocked windows and barren walls" may be that way to discourage crime in an "up and coming neighborhood" that had "suffered high rates of gun violence" in the recent past.
Folks, these are the kinds of barriers to small business, especially local gun stores, that are reducing consumer choice in your neighborhoods while even marijuana stores are increasingly hanging up their shingles all over the place. Don't stand for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment