On Thursday, Feb. 23 at 3:20 a.m., Burien Police officers were called to investigate several subjects who were likely spray painting graffiti at a business in the 13600 block of Ambaum Blvd. SW, the site of ongoing problems and gang related shootings (map below).

Police say that one subject was found to be in possession of a handgun and was booked into the Youth Center for a felony possession of a handgun.

“Great job by our officers!”

Founder/Publisher/Editor. Three-time National Emmy Award winning Writer (“Bill Nye the Science Guy”), Director, Producer, Journalist and more...

18 replies on “Burien Police arrest graffiti vandals near troubled apartments, find handgun”

  1. Instead of spending the big bucks for a new logo, they should use that money to have a policeman or 3 stationed there instead of waiting for sh*t to happen.

  2. It is great that our police took a handgun away from somebody that in all probability should not have handgun. It is a problem that needs to be addressed. The problem is the systematic brainwashing of society thru fake media and control of your thoughts.
    In Russia EVERY child must be able to dis-assemble and re-assemble blindfolded an AK-47 rifle. Here In the 1960’s there were gun safety classes held at school. Education is the answer. There are five (5) american cities that mandate gun ownership. The crime in these five cities dropped to zero (0). People have become sheep and no longer know how to protect themselves let alone how to hunt and kill for food. It is the people who fear guns are the ones to fear. The misguided mindset of society simply puts you at risk.of not being able to protect your community. What has city council done to ensure that Burien has a well equipped and trained militia that is NOT your national guard. Nothing. Thank you for taking the time to read this. Be safe everyone.

    1. Joe, could you cite some references for that claim about the drop in crime rates? From what I can find there are no real statistics on that, but it might just be that I didn’t find them.

      From what I could find the laws are essentially symbolic and not enforced, and usually have a lot of exemptions.

      Calling them “cities” could be a bit generous too, most I’ve never even heard of.

      Kennesaw appears to be the largest of them, and has what is apparently considered the “model” mandatory gun law.

      The effect on crime is apparently not statistically significant, partly because in most of these towns it so low to start with.

    2. Wow! Five cities mandate gun ownership and now have a zero crime rate.
      Couple questions though:
      What are the five cities?
      How do you force someone to buy a gun?
      Why would Burien need a trained militia if we all just bought guns and there was no crime?
      Are the armed citizens supposed to shoot spray paint vandals on sight to stop them? Or is that the militias’ job?
      This half-cocked idea is unbelievable.

      1. Lee: I was kinda taken by the hunting and killing for food part. Sounds like the good old days when America was great. Tom

  3. Thank you for responding Kevin and Lee,

    1. Kennesaw, Georgia, 2. Nelson, Georgia, 3. Nucla, Colorado, 4. Gun Barrel City, Texas, 5. Virgin, Utah. are the five citys. The list is growing because it works.

    Link ONE

    Perhaps the law may be symbolic, such as the SANCTUARY fluff that is in the air, It does symbolize that citizens have had enough of the sophomoric gang mentality, lack of protection by our police because they generally short handed and often are tied up with frivolous minor disturbances that interfering with intervening real crime. These cities are motivated and acted upon it. There will always be exemptions in any law.

    How do you force someone to buy a gun?
    The same way you now pay triple DOT registration fees for your vehicle, it was voted by the people, for the people who live there.

    Why would Burien need a trained militia if we all just bought guns and there was no crime?
    Yes. It is your Constitutional obligation to support the 2nd Amendment. “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the Right of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Congress made it clear that the national guard is not the militia. The ‘Militia’ referred to in the Second Amendment is even clearer today. Senate Document 2807: Congress had organized the National Guard under its power to ‘raise and support armies’ and not its power to ‘Provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia.’ The modern National Guard was specifically intended to avoid status as the constitutional militia, a distinction recognized by 10 U.S.C. 311(a).

    This question is just dumb “Are the armed citizens supposed to shoot spray paint vandals on sight to stop them? ”
    That is as bad as they guy who shot at the thief steeling his Jeep and killed his neighbor sleeping in bed. Horrible!
    First, you do not shoot somebody for spray painting, that is gang idiocy logic. Also it is not the domain of the militia.

    Look, Congress knew of the corruption of leaders back then and feared for the peoples safety. The law is created to prevent injury and death of its citizens by providing them the legal tools to defend themselves of a despot government.

    It is perfectly okay that you do not HAVE to join a militia, only those who understand sidearms and have a heart felt desire to protect the families and children with proper tools in case of despotism of the Government. We would not be having to take in Syrian refugees if they had been permitted to defend themselves against a government that turned.

    Perhaps the reason you claim “This half-cocked idea is unbelievable” is deficent historical knowledge of our Constitution. It is a shame the lack of education in this state which ranks near the bottom nation wide.

    Thank you for having a civil discussion. Education is the answer more than ever. Be safe out there and have no fear.

    1. Joe
      None of your links shows that more armed citizens means less crime. The murder rate has consistently gone down over the last 20 years or so and concealed carry permits went up substantially in the last ten years or so. There is no evidence that one causes the other. The gun sales and permit usage went up during Obama’s administration because the erroneous paranoia expressed by NRA et al that Obama was going to seize guns and attack 2nd amendment rights. Crime rates probably have more to do with our education system, the economy, and a support network for those with difficulties.
      If correlation means causation then having a lot of people holding up umbrellas makes it rain.

      1. Lee – while I might not sign on to everything Joe is recommending, I think its worthwhile to consider my earlier question in response to this incident: “where were their parents?”

        Consider Chicago: last year there were 3,550 shootings. Now, what do you think is the illegitimacy rate in Chicago? Now, before you start calling me names, let me tell you that I don’t believe illegitimacy rate to be the sole reason for the crime problem – there are other factors. But I do not here many people talking about the illegitimacy problem. And it is a big factor.

        1. Peter,
          In my experience with at risk kids the dad could be gone for a lot of reasons but the reasons are not the point. We need to hold the parents responsible if we can. I agree we should support freely available birth control, which the Republicans want to remove from the ACA even as an insurance coverage. Another good reason to support Planned Parenthood.
          In Chicago, and other urban areas, I think the statistics would show that the availability of guns is a far bigger crime factor than whether a child’s parents are married.
          I’ve yet to see a credible study that shows owning and/or carrying a gun improves one’s safety. Generally, as I recall, they show the opposite.

          1. Thank you for responding, Lee. Actually – Chicago has one of the more strict gun control laws in the country. Yet gun violence runs rampant. That suggests to me that something other than the gun laws in Chicago is causing the high crime rate.

            Also, the places where the crime is worst – the inner cities – is where Planned Parenthood is most prevalent. Black babies are aborted in inner cities at rates far exceeding white babies elsewhere. I guess you think even more black babies should be aborted in order to reduce crime? How many more?

            Consider that in the 40’s, the illegitimacy rate among blacks was around 14%. Black unemployment was only slightly higher than whites then. And crime was not rampant in the inner cities as it is now. And before you think this is a conservative rant – note that the liberal Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned of the effects of illegitimacy among black families as early as the mid-60’s. Of course he was called a racist for that. Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell (both African-American) have made similar arguments as I am making (or should I say, I am echoing them).

            It seems to me a no-brainer that having a mom and a dad around that is interested in the health and safety of their child would be a counter to the conditions which pull youth to join gangs and commit gun crimes. Definitely a better solution than aborting more babies to reduce crime or passing yet more gun laws.

          2. Peter,
            I agree that local (city wide, e g) gun laws have little effect on crime. It does, however, give the police one more tool against armed bad guys they do catch. Seattle’s gun tax idea is even more useless. Country wide control does have a positive effect.
            Planned Parenthood goes where women’s health services are most needed. As you should know, abortions are a small part of their services but an easy target for their opponents who don’t want to recognize the women’s health services they mostly offer. Where birth control services are readily available, abortion rates are lower.
            You can easily argue against inflammatory ideas that you “guess” I’m thinking. Your ignorance about my thoughts is likely matched in other areas so I see no point in further responses.

          3. Lee – you need to quit looking at issues through the clouded lens of your liberal ideology. I am disappointed (but not surprised) in your lack of response to the substance of my post. Your solution to the crime problem amounts to “abort more black babies and abolish the 2nd amendment.” And this is in the face of obvious facts which I have pointed out to you which show that the problem is not legal access to guns, but deeper social problems such as illegitimacy (which you have ignored).

            Regarding Planned Parenthood and abortion: they manipulate the data to mislead people into thinking that abortion is a small part of their services. PP is all about abortion. Planned Parenthood counts as a “service” the handing out of a pamphlet, or distributing condoms at a high school. They fudge the numbers. And gullible liberals accept this without question.

            One would hope that even committed liberals would be open to discussion of the issues, and not be such docile, obedient adherents to an ideology.

  4. Lee,
    Thank you for responding!
    If the twenty year data on murder only is charted against a ten year data spread of only Concealed Carry you will yield a disproportionate graph (Biased/Skewed)
    Data relevant to 20 years of all major crimes vs data from all sidearm holders not just exclusion of the concealed might project a very different picture.
    With that said, I do not know if that data does exists. It would interesting though..
    I do know that we are over run with heroin users, meth users, crank crank (et al).
    I know that more than a few people have had their fill of the stolen property, burglary, and endless petty thefts. The police are so damn busy that you are asked to fill a report and send it in. That may be as far as it goes for all I know..
    I do know that if they know I have a gun, they will go for easier pickings.
    (NRA recommends Do not post that you have a guns!)
    So, if your postulate would prove true, then therefore If nobody carry’s an umbrella it would not rain. Because we know this is simply not true then by the same token. Will crime go away if we are all protected? I don’t believe so, Therefore, if nobody has guns THEN there would be endless crime (Because the bad guys will not give up their guns. I grew up near Tombstone AZ. I still recall back in the day a cowboy would have to hang his guns on a post at the bar door. That just could not happen with today’s lack of respect and lack of ethics of today’s criminals (Not that they ever had any, or they wold be criminals) Point is the gun is what tamed the west. The way I see it, its not so tame anymore. Maybe I am just a looking in the wrong end of the telescope
    If we get rid of guns, why acres of real estate might open up again because there wont be enough people alive to give a damn.
    Thank you for having a civil discussion. Education is the answer more than ever. Be safe out there and have no fear

    1. Anybody know the nationality or lack there of the person’s arrested? Might be the start of an compelling argument or pro position for the immigration law enforcement now in affect. It’s all known fact when on the table for review and discussion and you can’t argue the truth.

Comments are closed.