HIRED OFFICIALS IN GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA DEMUR ON BULLET DESTRUCTION

 I asked a local official to introduce me to the Chief of Police here in Glendale to ask him to participate in the destruction of bullets that I intend to take "off the market" as a gesture to save lives.   To me it is obvious that, ultimately, the problem is the bullets.  Guns must have bullets to do the killing. (Except when used as clubs, which is another issue all together.)

Previously, I posted my experience at a local gun shop where my bullet buying ended with my asking the owner to sign the receipt for the box of 9mm that I virtually had in my hands. Only when I asked him and his clerk to sign the receipt did they ask me for my personal information.  I could have exited the store, bullets in hand before without a question. It was only AFTER I asked that the 'rule' changed.  

It is disappointing that the City of Glendale officials will not endorse the 'political' action of the destruction of bullets.  I don't see it as a political action.  It's a human response to a problem that needs to be fixed. 

The city official noted that the LA County Sheriff, James "Jim" McDonnell is an elected official and may be approachable.  This 'journey' is much more complicated than I thought it would be.  

Mostly, I hope that individuals will make an effort to take bullets off the market and destroy them.  This is a small gesture.  At least I'll have the personal satisfaction of knowing that I made an effort and that the few bullets I'll destroy will never kill anyone.  

If government officials are unwilling to help, that makes a statement all by itself.  Interestingly, in Los Angeles, from time to time the police have "buy backs" for guns (which would include bullets? I don't know?) and so for Glendale to opt out of one person's effort to do essentially the same thing seems a bit odd.     Does the City of Glendale endorse killing with bullets? Of course, not.  Does the City endorse saving lives?  That is a question that I hope to find out the answer to.

This from a hired Glendale, California Official: 

"While I certainly share your sadness and frustration both in terms of the tragedy in Oregon itself, as well as the overall inability of the Congress to enact meaningful gun control and/or mental health reform, I don’t think either I or Chief Castro can participate in your protest.  As an appointed (versus elected) public official, the Chief’s job is to enforce the law.  He and I must be politically sensitive to our Council and community, however, our professional integrity largely rests upon being apolitical.  The difference is that we analyze and recommend options, actions and solutions to policymakers, but we do not enter the realm of advocacy and act as policymakers ourselves.  If Chief Castro were to engage in your expression of free speech there would be an expectation that either a) he would participate in other expressions of free speech  – particularly those in favor of lax weapons laws; or b) that he fully agrees with your speech and opposes the contrary position, which would lead him into the area of making policy versus enforcing it.  Conversely, if the Chief were himself an elected law enforcement official (like the LA County Sheriff), then he would have complete latitude over his political actions, endorsements, etc."