Seattle police officer will never violate his fellow citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

As always, I speak for myself and not my city, department, mayor, or chief. After the media skewering I received from Seattle government in 2011 for daring to speak against its radical social justice agenda, it is no secret that I am a Seattle police officer. I have served the citizens proudly for more than two decades now.

What I have to say in this column affects me as a cop and you as a citizen. The current dash by left-wing gun control radicals even further to the fringe, racing to exploit the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, is as shameful and frightening as it is expected. Once again, the ends justify the means.

I only have personal experience with the City and Department violating my First Amendment rights, and not my Second Amendment rights. However, I figure if Seattle’s political and administrative liberals, who are ostensibly free speech supporters, would so readily violate the speech rights they purport to revere, surely they would not hesitate to violate gun rights they obviously detest. An ineffectual “gun buy-back” program will initiate new “gun-safety” efforts later this month. Can more insanity, or perhaps more appropriately, inanity, be far behind?

It is not enough for police officers simply to have decided for themselves as law enforcement officers that they will not enforce Second Amendment-infringing laws and policies. Cops should be particularly explicit in announcing that they will not stand by while the government makes criminals out of law-abiding citizens. They need to think ahead of time where the line is that they will not cross.

One top cop who recently gouged his line in the Linn County, Oregon sand is Sheriff Tim Mueller. His eloquent defense of his citizen’s liberty and gun rights, in a letter to Vice President Biden, should inspire all officers. Sheriff Mueller minced no words when he declared neither he nor his deputies would enforce any laws abridging the Second Amendment. Hooray for this brave Sheriff. He is a true American leader.

Saying one will not enforce a particular law may seem somewhat frivolous, or even insubordinate. However, as is the case in Seattle, the liberal government had no problem not enforcing marijuana laws (before legalization), and enforcing/not enforcing the traffic crime of Driving While License Suspended 3rd Degree, according to a biased social justice criteria. Laws abridging a constitutional amendment certainly rise higher in importance than pot and traffic offenses.

Some aspects of the current gun issue stand out. One is a disconcerting disconnect regarding the link between self-defense and the means to self-defense. There is nearly universal acceptance that people have the right to defend themselves and others from those who would do them harm. This being the case, how do those who advocate for gun control reconcile their support for self-defense with their opposition to the most practical means to that defense? If handguns, rifles, and shotguns were not the most practical and effective means of personal defense, governments would be arming their law enforcement and military with something else.

We are fortunate here in Washington to have an exceptionally explicit state constitutional right to bear arms, especially when compared with other states such as New York. Having said that, even states like Washington need to be careful. How do I know this? The federal constitution also provides strong gun rights protections, but regardless of the Constitution, we have an enemy that will never fail to exploit death and disaster in order to attack the Second Amendment and law abiding gun owners.

When we have states passing ludicrous gun and magazine capacity restrictions and even confiscation laws, and a federal government considering doing similarly, but with executive orders, can the people of any state in the union truly be secure in their right to keep and bear arms? Outlaws do not obey laws! They’re outlaws. Do we really have to keep saying this?

I have long attempted to provide an opposing viewpoint to Seattle government’s extreme liberal bias and its policy of forcing its radical social justice agenda down its employees’ throats. In 2011 the City and Department violated my First Amendment rights. My Department ordered me not to talk to the media about a published article they had conceded I had a right to write, and they launched an official investigation into my private political speech, exclusively in order to insure I keep my mouth shut.

In the end, these bullies discovered a loophole that apparently allows the City to avoid liability, which they can now use to violate any of its cops, or other city employees’, free speech rights. Neither the Seattle, nor Washington state, governments are friends of the Second Amendment or the Washington Constitution’s gun rights. But your cops are. I, speaking for at least one of them, will never enforce a law which makes currently law-abiding gun owners, criminals, nor will I ever comply with any order to confiscate your guns.

Express your thoughts