world

San Francisco's last gun store closing doors for good

51 Comments
By PAUL ELIAS

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

51 Comments
Login to comment

The city of San Francisco never would have resorted to those outrageous measures if the massive population of gun nuts had not blocked more sensible national gun control measures in the past. They are doing what they CAN do, even if its less than ideal, because its all they CAN do. Gun nuts have themselves to blame.

7 ( +13 / -6 )

Having the vendor record every sale of a potentially dangerous item and submit a weekly report of ammunition sales to the police sounds very sensible. The law-abiding, respectable Americans who want a gun merely to practice their sports marksmanship, or to add to their collection, or to keep safely locked away unloaded in a gun cabinet as a home protection measure, should have no problem. Same with ammunition, if it's being used responsibly there's no problem reporting how much has been sold.

Makes one wonder what the law-abiding, respectable gun-owners simply availing themselves of their 2nd Amendment Rights have to hide?

14 ( +18 / -5 )

The only gun store in San Francisco is shuttering for good, saying it can no longer operate in the city’s political climate of increased gun control regulations and vocal opposition to its business.

Three cheers. Wish there were more places like San Francisco. Proves that the gun-control fight can be won -- it just has to be won on a local level.

7 ( +9 / -4 )

“This is the city that defended gay marriage and fights for unpopular causes like medical marijuana,” he said. “Where’s my support?”

For the intelligent, that would be a sign that there is something fundamentally wrong with your cause.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

......because customers wrongly believed their purchases would be recorded and turned over to police.

Apart from the fact that those customers are not bright enough to understand that the bill in question was only proposed and not in force, what else do they have to hide?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

But the illicit sales sources abound, unrestricted and undocumented. The majority of firearms offenders obtain weapons illegally. All that this will do is inconvenience law-abiding citizens. But go ahead and celebrate your hollow "victory".

-5 ( +4 / -10 )

Hurrah for progress!

“This is the city that defended gay marriage and fights for unpopular causes like medical marijuana,” he said. “Where’s my support?”

A slow learner for a native San Franciscan

3 ( +5 / -2 )

So are T-shirts that boast in English and Chinese that High Bridge is “The Last San Francisco Gun Store.”

It would have been helpful if AP's reporter had got off his rump and researched the city's gun crime figures for this article. If they have declined, that might suggest that the laws are working. Of course with the OK Corral (aka city of Oakland) across the bay, I can't see how sales restrictions in San Francisco will make much difference in the body count.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

cleo: "Makes one wonder what the law-abiding, respectable gun-owners simply availing themselves of their 2nd Amendment Rights have to hide?"

Exactly. Gun nutters on here and elsewhere claim that there is no problem with law-abiding citizens owning and collecting guns, even though it is moronic to own 14, or 25, or even ONE; and yet they complain every time legislation is suggested that would make things SAFER for everyone!

The bottom line is, guns are not necessary. If people THINK they are, then there need to be better safeguards put into place. If they can't follow those, the shops need to close, like this one. Good riddance.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

The majority of firearms offenders obtain weapons illegally.

So the minority of firearms offenders can no longer obtain firearms legally, at least from this store, which must be a plus. As an aside, most of the school shooters had reportedly obtained weapons legally.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

High Bridge will close Oct. 31, Alcairo said.

Good riddance.

“Anything that makes San Francisco safer, I support,”

Glad some people have common sense and are not afraid to stand up to the lobby of gun-producers, distributors and users.

Alcairo grew up near the store and says he is angry and disappointed with San Francisco.

Hopefully, he will not turn out to be the next nut who decides to take revenge on innocent people to express his anger.

In the end, Alcairo said, he and the High Bridge Arms owner tired of the continued opposition and mountains of paperwork required by the San Francisco Police Department, state Department of Justice and the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

And

“I’m not doing that to our customers. Enough is enough,” Alcairo said. “Buying a gun is a constitutionally protected right. Our customers shouldn’t be treated like they’re doing something wrong.”

Yeah, because guns make you more secure. Your constitutionally protected right to carry a gun guarantees that the more you buy the smaller the chance is of getting killed by a gun? Haven’t we seen this argument invalidated so many times so far? Journalists, church-goers, cinema-goers, students… How many of them were saved by their carrying a gun? And how many children, parents, etc. were injured/killed in accidental firings of guns?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Now gun violence will come to a grinding halt in San Francisco.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Now gun violence will come to a grinding halt in San Francisco.

Probably not - there are still open borders with places where you can buy guns. But when gun violence is charted in relation to strict gun rules, there are less gun deaths in states/cities where there are stricter gun rules. So while the gun violence will not likely come to a grinding halt, it will likely dwindle even further.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

San Francisco's last gun store closing doors for good

I'll celebrate when its America's last gun store closing doors for good

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Now gun violence will come to a grinding halt in San Francisco.

Even I can smell the sarcasm. The man who owns the store is a fool. I'm for better gun-control as at least it will keep a better record of who and when someone bought what... just in case... you know, they go on a shooting spree and then are all of a sudden "mentally ill". Then the owner will be held responsible for not following procedures.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Having the vendor record every sale of a potentially dangerous item and submit a weekly report of ammunition sales

The latter is acceptable. The former is not.

Its not about having something to hide. Its about being treated like a criminal. I don't even like being recorded at the convenience store!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Buying a gun is a constitutionally protected right.

The slogan is repeated endlessly, copy & pasted. Unfortunately it is based on a fallacy. The fallacy being this is no longer the 17th century. Guns belong in the hands of law enforcement, militia, not in the hands of private individuals.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

“This is the city that defended gay marriage and fights for unpopular causes like medical marijuana,” he said. “

As far as I know gay folks getting hitched and people getting stoned off of pot never made it easy for people to go on mass killing sprees.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Its not about having something to hide. Its about being treated like a criminal.

How is it like being treated like a criminal? When you enter or leave the country you're obliged to prove who you are. If you buy a poison (rodenticide, etc.) in most countries, you have to provide ID and sign for your purchase. Why should the purchase of one potentially lethal item (a firearm) be any less restricted than the purchase of another (rat poison)?

Only a person buying rat poison for a purpose other than killing rodents would baulk at being identified. Why should a person buying a firearm for legitimate purposes be treated any different? Aren't you proud of your 2nd amendment rights? Why not raise your head and smile for the camera?

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Lovely work there SanFran. Now you can be as safe as other tightly controlled areas, like Chicago or Boston...

I'm no gun lover, never wanted one, but it is interesting that, as gun sales have climbed over the years, the crime rate has fallen. Coincidence?

The problem with gun laws is that only law abiding people will obey them. Criminals will get their weapons whatever the law says. Unless you are willing to have a national campaign of forced confiscation of firearms (especially handguns), then any solution will probably be nearly useless.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

"Criminals will get their weapons whatever the law says."

I cite the same principle to people who lock their doors and windows while out or in bed. If a robber or rapist wants get inside your home, he will. That's why I leave my doors and windows always open, all night.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Vast Right-Wing Conspirator,

I'm no gun lover, never wanted one, but it is interesting that, as gun sales have climbed over the years, the crime rate has fallen. Coincidence?

Crime has gone down in almost all advanced nations throughout the world, including those without guns. Clearly there are other factors involved in creating a world that's never been safer, and yet gun-advocates still need guns to feel protected.

What has gone up is senseless shootings by random nutjobs, police shooting unarmed children, an overflow of illigal guns, etc. Now those things might have something to so with increased gun sales.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The first poster was right. Typical gun nut paranoia killed San Francisco's last gun shop. No one was forcing this gun store to close. San Francisco has only passed or proposed fairly mild ordinances with regard to the sales of guns and ammunition. These laws and proposals do not come close to what other countries (like Japan) require for the purchase of guns and ammunition.

If gun stores and online gun and ammunition sellers have become unpopular it is because most cases the guns used were purchased legally. Blame the NRA and the gun lobby for that. But unpopularity did not close the gun shop in question.

As someone who is very fond of San Francisco, I am glad to see municipal attempt at gun control. As a native San Franciscan It is a pity that Steve Alcairo adopted the typical NRA paranoid view of gun control. Gun control did not destroy has business. He screwed himself.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Mr. Bum, my point is that the number of guns in circulation seems to have little relation to the crime rate. The murder rate is down nearly 40% over the past 20 years in the US, in spite of the increase in gun sales. It is simplistic to just say "less guns means less crime".

If you break down the numbers by type of firearm, the numbers are even more shocking. The number of murders with rifles (including so-called assault rifles) is I believe under 400 per year. Horrific to be sure... yet... Less than are killed with knives. Less than are killed with bare hands. Yet idiot politicians constantly call for bans on assault weapons and accessories.

No easy answers, especially given America's historic love of, and need for, firearms.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Mr. Bum, my point is that the number of guns in circulation seems to have little relation to the crime rate. The murder rate is down nearly 40% over the past 20 years in the US, in spite of the increase in gun sales. It is simplistic to just say "less guns means less crime".

And it is simplistic to equate more guns to meaning less crime. Correlation does not equal causation.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Don't worry, the Illegal Aliens will bring their OWN, WITH them.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The number of murders with rifles (including so-called assault rifles) is I believe under 400 per year.

That may be true, but who the hell needs an assault rifle? If any other single object in America resulted in a similar amount of deaths, year in and out, the outrage would be huge, demand for action immediate, and lawsuits would bankrupt any entity involved. But not with assault rifles.

And also not with guns in general. As can be seen at the link, guns have consistently been the weapon of choice for homicides for over 50 years, ranging from the low 60s to 70%.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Vast Right-Wing Conspirator,

You seemed to be saying there was a correlation between increased gun sales and reduced crime. While there may be a small chance of that, similarly reduced crime everywhere around the world seems to say otherwise.

I didn't say "less guns means less crime." While I fully admit violent crimes are at historic lows despite guns in America, mass shootings involving legally purchased guns are occurring every other month now. It's a separate problem and a serious one. How are politicians calling for assault weapon bans idiotic? Do you mean they need to go further? Is so, I agree.

The answer is actually pretty simple. Like cleo and others have said, make owning a firearm more difficult. Even a driver's license requires a test and some modicum of training. The problem is a powerful lobby, their bought politicians, and about half the public refusing to even see a problem or give up their "Constitutional freedom."

About that freedom and America's historic love of firearms, here's an interesting article. (In case you don't read it, it's not as historic as many think.)

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/so-you-think-you-know-the-second-amendment

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Good. Lead the way, SF.

Alcairo said news coverage of the bill’s introduction in July slowed sales considerably because customers wrongly believed their purchases would be recorded and turned over to police

If you have nothing to hide, then you should be fine. Recording the sales and logging ammo is a good idea! Sure, it's our "right" to keep guns, but I think enough people in the states (my home country) have proven themselves irresponsible and murderous with their weapons that maybe it's time to more thoroughly regulate and monitor the sales of firearms (in my mind, not "maybe", but definitely) I'd hate to punish the responsible folks for the sins of the few, but the few have caused enough mayhem as it is and anything that can help cut down the amount of victims of gun violence is a good thing.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"So far this year {2015}, there have been at least 294 mass shooting incidents. There have been 274 days." So begins an article about mass shooting in America by Catherine Cloutier in the Boston Globe, 1 Oct. 2015. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/10/01/there-have-been-more-mass-shootings-this-year-than-days/nsbTfUlAAL6iyBh0KvHmhO/story.html This tell you what America's lack of gun control is costing Americans.

This is not a major issue in Japan, where we have strict gun control.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Everytime people are beheaded, blownup or executed, we are told not to blame all muslims. Isnt it about time that law abiding gun owners got the same treatment???

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I'm shocked. Purchasing a firearm is legal in the USA, just like buying a baseball bat or a car, but I haven't seen anyone suggesting that every purchase be recorded of those items and send a weekly report to the government every time a car is filled with petrol or a baseball is sold WITH THE NAME of the purchaser.

Some people are against legal use of birth control in the USA. We should record them picking up their prescriptions and provide a weekly report of that activity to the city/state government too.

Same for marijuana purchases. THAT drug is illegal for non-medical use throughout the USA- federal law, which is higher than the state laws which some localities have passed to allow recreational use. Video those purchases too.

This is a slippery slope. Glad to know that so many people can decide what is right and legal for others.

I don't mind if local communities would rather not have a gun store in their neighborhood. They are free to purchase the store property and use it in whatever legal way they like. However, the US Constitution is there to protect citizen doing legal activities, even if unpopular. Purchasing and owning firearms is protected by the US Constitution. If people don't like it, change the Constitution.

BTW - I'm not a firearm lover, though do enjoy target shooting with friends once a year or so.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Kabukilover. If you look at the statistics, the rate of mass killings in the US has not been on the rise. It has been steady at least since the 1980s. Given that the population has increased substantially since that time, it's logical to assume that the rate of such crimes has actually decreased. What HAS increased is the media exposure and oversaturation of every form of communication about such crimes.

The problem is that Americans simply like guns. They like the history of them, they are an intrinsic part of the American story and culture and folklore in a way that is unlike any other country. Until such time as they lose this cachet, there really can't be much effective legislation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Vast, what is the source of your statistics? Even if correct, the problem is too many mass killings in the US. These overwhelmingly involve guns. Also psychos with guns. Who can easily and legally buy guns even though they are psychos.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

San Francisco's last gun store closing doors for good

Okay, fair enough, they closed one down. Now how about a "sweep" and "round-up" of all the illegal immigrants in the SF area and deport them. . . . Heck- the authorities would be sure to confiscate a few more guns while they're at it.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Kabukilover: My source is the FBI. The problem isn'T mass killings. Statistically, they are not that relevant. The real problem is the day to day violence in big cities, the casual use of mostly handguns by drug gangs. The kind of crimes that don't get a lot of media attention.

I can't think of a single recent case, with the possible exception of the Virginia Tech shooter, of a mass murderer who would have been prevented from getting guns by stricter background checks or by mental health screening. The perps generally have clean records until they snap.

I dont mean to sound flippant, but the US is a huge country. You are far more likely to die in a car crash, or choke on your food, than to die in a mass shooting.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Ditto that, Aly !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Say hello to more crime and violence San Francisco. It is sad seeing an American city attack law abiding citizens, while at the same time allowing illegal aliendls to run around killing people.

Way to go socialists, enjoy the Utopia. At least Los Angeles county has not headed as far down the path of foolishness

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Congratulations San Francisco!

Finally the WILL of the PEOPLE has put an end to what THE PEOPLE don't want, guns in their city!

So, for all the whiney State's Rights and Open Carry fetishists here's your proof, and thankfully hope for millions of Americans:

These deadly weapons of mass destruction can be controlled, regulated, reviewed and revoked when the Public's Safety is weighed against a hand full of paranoids and mental incompetents who want to kill because they can and don't really need much of any other actual rationale. CONGRATULATIONS! Let Freedom Reign from Sea to Shining Sea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

****This is the dumber than dumber you can go. I am glade I live in Tennessee. I would not live in that state if you gave it to me..

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The thing is, most gun owners are sensible people. I will be purchasing a private firearm for self-protection, should the need arise. 90% of the comments on this article are by people who have never touched a gun and are a lot of sheeple who blindly believe everything the media says. In my experience, knowledge of how to operate and properly use a firearm is invaluable knowledge. It's a shame the liberal agenda is so terrified of guns that they press for the outlaw of guns—causing this country to decay from the inside out. When the time comes, we will be biting ourselves for this.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Just wait and see what Obama has simmering. It will lead to a GOP landslide win in 2016 if he proceeds.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's funny how the 'cold dead hands' crew are the most vocal as long as it isn't their cold dead hands, or their children's.

All these "gun freedom" fans fail to recognize San Franciscans' have achieved the freedom to have these weapons of mass destruction banned from their streets.

That seems like a victory for the People to decide what they will tolerate in their own communities.

If the gunners want to have grandpa kill a father on the phone to his daughter at the movie theater, just let everyone know on the way into their deserted towns. Most will avoid your guns and your businesses, no problem.

What these half wits always fail to understand is the public will avoid crazy at the restaurant where open carriers terrify children or marching around in your concentration camps of racial hatred and rebel flag tattoos, no problem.

Please, if you want crazy at your superstore just give everyone the option to stay the heck out of your village idiot display of careless wanton destruction of human lives. Thanks, enjoy your freedom slaughters.

Oh, by the by, if you have belief in responsible gun ownership these freedom fighters keep shouting about, require background checks, require wait periods and ammunition limits. But gunners won't. It would be too inconvenient and would save lives and the gunner won't have that. 294 mass shootings a year is preferable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

****This is the dumber than dumber you can go. I am glade I live in Tennessee. I would not live in that state if you gave it to me..

Hah, Tennessee is a dump. San Francisco is one of the best cities in the US. I wouldn't live in the US again, but if I ever were to, SF would be my first choice of cities.

Just wait and see what Obama has simmering.

I think Obama gave up on gun control after the most basic of changes failed after Sandy Hook. That's why he threw it back to the people this time.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Makes one wonder what the law-abiding, respectable gun-owners simply availing themselves of their 2nd Amendment Rights have to hide?

You always have to love this type of argument and that is if you are not guilty of anything then you will willingly give up your right to privacy when the government demands it.

In the words of Glenn Greenwald:

“We all need places where we can go to explore without the judgmental eyes of other people being cast upon us. Only in a realm where we’re not being watched can we really test the limits of who we want to be. It’s really in the private realm where dissent, creativity and personal exploration lie.”

People who downplay the importance of privacy typically say "I have nothing to hide" but will then not publish their social media and email passwords.

Another quote from Gleen Greenwald:

“When we think we’re being watched, we make behavior choices that we believe other people want us to make," he said. "It’s a natural human desire to avoid societal condemnation. That’s why every state loves surveillance -- it breeds a conformist population.”

Cleo you remind me of Senator Diane Feinstein when she said that collecting call records doesn't count as surveillance if the actual conversations aren't recorded. The best part was when after saying that people started to demand that she published a list of the people whom she spoke to everyday and her response was that she would never do that.

That may be true, but who the hell needs an assault rifle?

@Laguana - Need is not a requirement in order to own or use a product or service for non-malicious reasons, besides life is so much more than just needs. You don't need to go skydiving, you don't need to have casual sex, you don't need to drink Alcohol, you don't need a car that goes faster than 55 mph, you don't need to eat meat, etc. Can you honestly truly say you live your entire life on the most basic of needs and there are zero "luxuries" in your life?

If any other single object in America resulted in a similar amount of deaths, year in and out, the outrage would be huge, demand for action immediate, and lawsuits would bankrupt any entity involved. But not with assault rifles.

According to Senator Diane Feinstein assault rifles kill an average of 45 people and wound 55 people each year in the USA or a per capita casualty rate of 0.03 per 100,000 when rounded up. So yeah anything that resulted in the deaths of 45 people out of 300+ million people is not going cause that type of outrage, demand for immediate action, or law suites that would bankrupt any entity involved........

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you remind me of Senator Diane Feinstein when she said that collecting call records doesn't count as surveillance if the actual conversations aren't recorded

Private correspondence is the same as buying a lethal weapon? No. Your logic is lacking.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Okay, fair enough, they closed one down. Now how about a "sweep" and "round-up" of all the illegal immigrants in the SF area and deport them. . . . Heck- the authorities would be sure to confiscate a few more guns while they're at it.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/san-francisco-woman-shot-killed-strolling-pier-father/story?id=32210463

This "illegal" murdered an innocent american woman taking a stoll in SF.

So I say again, they should quit violating the rights for prospective law abiding gun shopping americans in SF (by closing down this 1 shop), and do a sweep for illegal immigrants like the coward mentioned in the link.

In addition to confiscating more firearms in the process, the authorities might even discover meth, cocaine, counterfeit bills, fake pink slips, state/fed issued ID's . . . . you'd be surprised what mischief these illegals are involved in.

Mexico laughs it's ass off at the US (& the laws). Especially the "blue" states.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

A small step in the right direction.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

kcjapan:

What is "Shia-Tea"? You have been tossing this term around on several threads here, but never defined it. What does it mean?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Vast. First what is the specific source, something you can quote. Next, whatever the day to day murder rate. Is, mass murders matter. The reasons are self evident.

I happen to know guns very well. I am still a good shot at carnivals, though I have no guns around me. I have had an aversion to automatic weapons since childhood after a friend of the family accidentally killed his wife with a Browning. I like the taste of game and have absolutely nothing against food hunters. An old friend is gunsmith and makes only single shot rifles. That in my view is the ideal sporting arm. I am all for banning assault rifles and for stringent control laws. Responsible gun owners have nothing to fear from them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Private correspondence is the same as buying a lethal weapon? No. Your logic is lacking.

Yes considering all private business transactions are a form of private correspondence. If you don't consider purchasing of products or services a form of private correspondence then you would have no problem making all your transactions public, including what you bought, how much you bought, the price you paid, from whom you bought it from etc....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites