The Police Chief Who Wants to Abolish the Second Amendment by William Kirk
Hello. Good, everyone. Welcome to Washington Gun Law tv. I am Washington Gun Law President William Kirk. Thanks for joining us. Hey, Seattle. You got a new police chief? Oh, I'm sure things are going to turn around any moment. Now, for those of you who've been lifelong residents like myself of the greater Seattle area, we go through police chiefs about once every three years. And what's really been happening in the last few years is if that person doesn't check all of the political boxes correctly, well then it's time for them to go so they can bring somebody else in. Seattle has just hired its new police chief. He comes from Madison, Wisconsin. But with him, he brings well, some very anti-constitutional ideals. We'll see how well that plays out amongst the rank and file of the Seattle Police Department. So today, let's spend a few minutes and let's talk about the police chief who wants to abolish the Second Amendment.
Okay. Before we get going too far down the road, we're going down. Let's remember that this video is being brought to us by the Narran Desert Institute. That's right. Get ready to launch your career in the firearm industry today. Get ready to start arming yourself with education today. And most importantly, get ready to start defending the inalienable rights of millions of Americans nationwide all through what? That's right, education. Listen, the Sonoran Desert Institute has a certificate, a program, or a degree for just about anything that you may desire. So if you're finally ready to launch that career in the firearm industry, visit our good friends at the Sonoran Desert Institute. They're down there in the description box, or easier yet, you can just visit 'em at sdi.edu. Okay. Seattle, your new police chief is Sean Barnes. He comes from Madison, Wisconsin, and he absolutely hates and would like to abolish the Second Amendment. And I know a lot of you're like, oh, he's just trying to click beta. That's all hyperbole. It's all conjecture. It's all political hot air. Yeah. Well, let's just take it straight from the new chief's mouth.
Chief Sean Barnes:
We have a lot of things that are legal, but is it the right thing to do? We have to rise above that. And sometimes it requires an evolution of our thinking. What was written in 1789 may not be appropriate for 2022 unless we're okay with kids being killed.
Reporter:
You're referencing the Second Amendment?
Chief Sean Barnes:
Yes, I am.
Now, that interview actually occurred in May of 2022. It came to light, however, because as we know, chief Barnes recently had a school shooting happen inside of his jurisdiction. So it appears to the chief, and I don't know what kind of jurisprudence background he may have. Did he go to law school or something like that. But the chief is of the opinion that your constitutional rights have an expiration date on him, and the Second Amendment is long past expiration and therefore society would be better. This is a police chief saying this society would be better if you were stripped of your constitutional rights. Now, what we do know about the chief is he is going to check a lot of the political boxes that the Seattle leadership wants, which is lazy, unimaginative, and stupid progressive arguments. And yes, chief Barnes definitely checks all three of those boxes, but you see this entire argument, the entire argument that's floated by all the progressives.
The entire argument that gets floated by my brother-in-law every time we're together at holidays is that you don't need these. And if we just got rid of all the guns, suddenly the world would be perfectly okay. And the argument that often gets used is that, well, when the founders ratified the Second Amendment, they had no idea of the type of weaponry that we would have, and that is probably entirely true. You know what else is entirely true? Chief Barnes and my brother-in-law is that when they ratified the First Amendment, the only type of communications, written communications we had was actually going to involve a feather pen with a quill. Okay? And there was no form of electronic communication. There was no internet or any of that are we suggested that the First Amendment does not protect any of those kinds of communications because if the Chief's argument is correct, then that's the case.
And let us remember that First Amendment also guarantees the freedom of the press. Now, the only type of press we had back in the late 17 hundreds was actually a printing press. Now, according to Chief Barnes, that would be the only thing that would be constitutionally protected. Any of the modern mainstream media or social media platforms would not fall under any type of first degree protections. And if the chief is also right, you recognize that in the late 17 hundreds when we ratified the First Amendment, there was only nine organized religions in the United States, and shockingly all of 'em were Christian in nature. Are we suggesting that the First Amendment only protects those nine religions and any other religion to come since then is not guaranteed protection under the First Amendment? Well, let's move on to some other constitutional amendments because the chief may have some problems with this too.
Like the Fourth Amendment, a big one for law enforcement, by the way, that guarantees us the right to be free from unreasonable government searches and seizures. Now, when the Fourth Amendment was ratified about the only type of government and seizure that you could encounter would be government agents kicking down your door and rummaging through your things according to the chief. Then all forms of modern surveillance, electronic surveillance, wire tapping, satellite imaging, or any of those other things, none of that is protected by the Fourth Amendment. Does the chief believe that the Fifth Amendment is outdated and that perhaps people who are accused of crime should be forced to give testimony against themselves? Does the chief believe that people really are no longer entitled to right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment, or a right to confront their accusers because that too has become antiquated? Hey, let's talk about the Eighth Amendment that protects us from cruel and unusual punishment.
Now, the types of cruel and unusual punishment that were available in the late 17 hundreds are far different than the types of cruel and unusual punishment that could be inflicted in the year 2024. But according to Seattle Police Department's new chief, that is perfectly okay because protections from modern forms of cruel and unusual punishment would according to the chief, not be protected by the Eighth Amendment. So for those of you unfortunate enough to live in what was once a great city, Seattle, if you're still there, please understand that you still reside in a jurisdiction which has systematically de policed the community. And now you have a police chief who not only believes that you should not be arming yourself and protecting yourself, but that you shouldn't even have the inalienable right to do so. Chief Barnes, welcome to Seattle. You, sir, have an open invitation.
You are welcome to contact Washington Gun Law whenever you'd like, and you are absolutely positively welcome to come on to our channel so that you and I can have a discussion about your views of the Second Amendment. It is a standing and open invitation. Listen, if you've got any questions about this or anything else related to what's left of our Second Amendment rights, you guys should know how to get ahold of Washington Gun Law by now. But if you don't, that's okay. That information's down there in the description box. If you got an idea for video, we should be doing around here. Cool. Let's hear all about it. Click on that link right there to let us know if you want to subscribe to our monthly newsletter. The ability to do all of that is right down there in the description box. And then finally, and most importantly, let's remember that part of being a lawful and responsible gun owner, like we talk about all the time here, is to know what the law is in every situation, how it applies to you in any instance that you may find yourself. Until next time, thanks for watching and stay safe.
Credit: William Kirk, Esq. Washington Gun Law