San Francisco Wanted Info on Gun Owners. This Gun Shop Refused.
High Bridge Arms, founded in the mid-1950s by Olympic shooter Bob Chow, shuts down rather than give local police its customer list.
Over the weekend, San Francisco will lose its last gun store: High Bridge Arms.
Why? The city has mandated that gun shops hand over information about its customers to the cops.
"Just the idea of giving that information willingly to the police department, for no real reason, seemed very unreasonable to me." says Steven Alcairo, the general manager of High Bridge Arms. Alcairo notes that the store already complies with all federal and state reporting requirements.
Mark Farrell, a member of San Francisco's Board of Supervisors, was behind the local ordinance. The ordinance places new requirements on gun shops like High Bridge Arms, such as videotaping everything that happens in their stores and providing the San Francisco Police Department with weekly updates on customers and purchases.
"I would never introduce legislation to hurt a small business in our city," Farrell told the local NBC affiliate. "However, if a gun store in particular wants to close as a result of it, so be it."
High Bridge Arms' website says the shop was opened in 1952 by the renowned Olympic shooter Bob Chow. It was later bought by Andy Takahashi in the late 1980s. It was Takahashi who made the decision to close the doors.
"You know, I think I would like it if San Franciscans would just kinda take a look at this," says Alcario. "We decriminalized medical marijuana, we pioneered equal rights. But in the same town you're gearing laws specifically to make it hard on me,"
About 3 minutes. Produced by Alex Manning. Filmed by Paul Detrick. Music by Podington Bear.
Scroll down for downloadable versions of this video. And subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel for daily content like this.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Is this just retail or does it cover all FFLs doing transfers?
I've seen in postings that San Fran's FFLs were charging in the ballpark of $90 to transfer. My FFL charges $20 and you get every fifth one free. They give you a fun frequent transfer card where they punch a hole through a different gun silhouette at each transfer until you get to five.
An online search shows High Bridge and some "Cash Loan" place in South San Fran as the only FFLs. But cross a bridge or drive south into San Bruno and it's more fertile. Probably still not cheap though.
South San Francisco is a different city and different county. SF's idiocy has not (yet) infected other jurisdictions.
If I understand correctly, for an FFL to oopen up his Transfer Book to anyone outside the BATF is a violation of federal regs.
Farrell's quote is such a blatant lie it's hard to even care that he's lying.
[Insert politician's name]'s quote is such a blatant lie it's hard to even care that he's lying.
ftfy.
It reminds me of the politicians in Connecticut that claimed they didn't want to lose gun manufacturing jobs and tax base, as they were making it illegal to sell or own the guns within the state.
Though now that I think of it, SF at least isn't shooting their tax base in the foot over one shop, so maybe they're a little less stupid economically than CT in this case.
Huntsville, AL...where I live...got a Remington Plant from Upstate NY and now it seems that DPMS is moving its operation from MN to Hsv as well.
"Nobody is going to take your guns..."
Just nip away at the edges until owning one is not worth the hassle.
/Prog.
Nobody took away my cigarettes, either. They just made the habit impossible.
According to radio coverage I heard, there is no such ordinance (yet), but rather a proposed ordinance from Farrell. So while I agree that Farrell's quote certainly is disingenuous, describing this as an "ordinance" or talking about SF "mandating" is premature (although I don't doubt that SF would enact the proposal).
This is a case where getting the facts right matters because those in favor of gun control are *already* calling Takahashi disingenuous for saying he is closing due to an ordinance that doesn't actually exist. Reporting that accepts a *proposed* ordinance as though it already existed opens reason up to a similar criticism.
Adjusting the reporting to state that Takahashi preemptively closed down to avoid the possibility of needing to comply with the rule seems like it would be accurate and forestall criticism of reporting as credulous and biased.
And I just checked Farrell's legislative record. Indeed he has not yet sponsored any such ordinance nor has he even filed such an ordinance for vote. He has discussed it in the Board of Supervisors, but that is as far it has gone.
His record is publicly available here
To be clear, looking at the ordinances he has sponsored, this is a guy who has never seen a regulation or restriction he didn't like and who loves to hand out money to those he likes, so there is plenty not to like about him, but it is dubious for Takahashi to blame the closure specifically on Farrell and a non-existent ordinance, especially as he has talked publicly about closing for some time anyway.
Again, I think it would be perfectly accurate to say that the proposal was the straw that broke the camel's back and that Takahashi was worried it would happen and so wanted time to close his operations without a new ordinance complicating things. I'm not defending Farrell, but you need to be accurate.
This description of 10/27 action by the board matches the article's claim.
http://kron4.com/2015/10/27/sa.....gun-sales/
Seems the public site isn't up to date then and this passed probably the same day I heard the radio interview with Takahashi, at which point he was already closing down.
I don't know what it said when you looked at it, but here is the legislative report on the bill. It passed on 10/27 with 9 ayes and 2 excused.
"You had plenty of opportunity, provided by the state, to choose from a business on the approved lists, but you chose the thwart the will of your fellow citizens. Intentional injury to the body politic must be punished."
/SF bureaucrat
Why doesn't San Francisco cut to the chase and make all gun owners wear some type of arm band or maybe pieces of flair on their jackets?
You know who else had to wear pieces of flair...
Jennifer Aniston
priceless.
Who in their right mind would want to open up a small business in San Francisco? They've got to be the most hostile city to capitalism a free market economics in nation, and the sad part is that they're proud of it.
Damn. High Bridge Arms was in my old neighborhood. So are a lot of pot shops, um, I mean "medical marijuana clinics" and I wonder how my neighbors would feel about the city mandating that they hand over all of the information they have about their customers to the police.
Goddamn conservative teabaggers violating my right to privacy!
About like that.
Farrell.... show us the data...
graph gun violence incidents over the past, say, ten or twenty years in SF and let's see if there's any visible impact that could possibly be attributed to your actions.
If, during some reasonable amount of time, like six or twelve months or a few years, gun violence does NOT change appreciably, please publish that fact, rescind your stupid law and quit your position. If it were Japan and you had personal honor, you'd fall on your sword, too.
Let's see how this works. I'm a bank robber with one, two, maybe three convictions, and I go into a gun store to legally buy a gun. Huh? Nah, I'll just buy one off one of my home boys.
"I would never introduce legislation to hurt a small business in our city," Farrell told the local NBC affiliate. "However, if a gun store in particular wants to close as a result of it, so be it."
So, in other words, if a gun store want to close as a result of legislation designed to hurt a small business that's their decision, not our.
Hey, all you criminals note, San Francisco is becoming gun free city, so wait until they outlaw all ownership within city limits then come one come all. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Does that include the cops?
You gotta love the plausible deniability. Of course they didn't intend to shut down the business, they just wanted to make sure nobody in their right mind would patronize it. It's not the city's fault that the business owner believes in silly things like "the Constitution", "the Second Amendment", "the Fourth Amendment", "the Fifth Amendment", "the Fourteenth Amendment", and "the Declaration of Independence". Where did he even get these crazy ideas? The city of San Francisco has spoken, and they've got a police force to make sure their will is law.
There is, I think,a difference between the people of San Francisco and the Board of Supervisors. Of course, realizing that it's the former that elect the latter, who knows.
I fucking hate liberals, I can't say it enough, fucking control freak, bully retards. I wish every megalomaniacal one of them would choke to death on their Noam Chomsky and Karl Marx books, fucking bottom feeding scumbags.
This would be unconstitutional if imposed on porn shops or gay bars.
Geez, RLW. Tell us how you really feel, don't beat around the bush!!!
Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job I've had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,
---------- http://www.4cyberworks.com
Shouldn't there be a trigger warning on this article for having a video with a picture of a handgun?
Having lived in Te Bay Area, mostly Oakland, for about 3 years, way back in the late 1960's, I got to know the area fairly well. Restaurants were great, the climate very nice, scenery lovely, ad there were a couple of quite good military rifle ranges easily accessible for monthly competitions, where I ran into Bob Chow a couple of times. While Pistol Shooting was his forte, he was pretty good with 30 caliber rifles, as I remember.
That having been said,and with respect to the maudlin ramblings, aka Double talk issuing forth from Mark Farrell, I wonder as to what he andothers of his ilk might next scre
Computer or operator problems evidenced above. Please see below
Having lived in The Bay Area for 3 years in the late 1960's, I had grown quite fond of San Fransisco. Great tr3esturants and bsrs, wonderful climate most of the time, and truly wonderful views. There were alo, withion easy comuting disyance a couple of quite good military rifle ranges, whee there were monthly shoting competitions held. Bob Chow used to show up at them now and then. While he was essentially a Pistol Competitor, he was no slouch wiyh a 30 caliber rifle, as I remeber.
In any event, regarding the above subject, and the antics of Mark Farrell, I wonder at to what he and or others ofr similar ilkmight next scre
Computer or operator problems evidenced above. Please see below
Having lived in The Bay Area for 3 years in the late 1960's, I had grown quite fond of San Fransisco. Great restaurants and bars, wonderful climate most of the time, and truly wonderful views. There were also, within easy commuting distance a couple of quite good military rifle ranges, where there were monthly shooting competitions held. Bob Chow used to show up at them now and then. While he was essentially a Pistol Competitor, he was no slouch with a 30 caliber rifle, as I remember. He also struck me as a gentleman. In any event, regarding the above article, and the antics of Mark Farrell, I wonder as to what else he and or others of similar ilk might next screw up. Perhaps restaurants, maybe the weather, possibly the view, who knows
Wow, this sounds like 1930's Germany.
So thankful I live in Arizona.
i'm having a conversation of sorts along these lines, although from a different angle with someone advocating more gun restrictions. i'm not a libertarian, but i increasingly don't understand their side of the argument. i like to give the benefit of the doubt and then some, but i'm starting to suspect they don't understand their own argument very well either.
I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link... Try it, you won't regret it!......
http://www.OnlineJobs100.Com
you guys are looking at this all wrong..
San Franfreako would never harm a small business unless it was for the greater good, now the gun store owners are free to fulfil their dreams without silly restrictions.. see it is a win win until of course the madness of leftwing ideology spreads (most likely through Government indoctrination centers that ironically are funded by the threat of government guns)
It would be better if politicians were forced to wear a costume that showed them as their favorite parasite bed bugs, fleas ticks tapeworms the list is endless parasitic works alone could cover the entire political circus in California. At least the public would begin to understand the nature of government.
of course if we use all the really great parasites for politicians what would we use for public school teachers?
I believe that the correct legal answer to such a demand is "not without a warrant, motherfucker."
-jcr
I saw this article via a post on City-Data forums where Brazil, which has one of the highest murder tolls on the planet, could soon end most restrictions on gun ownership, risking what one critic called a "Wild West" scenario.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/.....cle/447959
I think San Francisco should take a cue from Brazil. 😉
This is obviously racial profiling of an asian-owned business by the white racist liberal establishment sity council in San Francisco. #asiangunshopsmatter
A recent play by anti-gun progs is trying to downplay the idea that guns even help with self-defense anyway. It's a repackaging of an older line of argumentation aimed at ridiculing the idea that armed resistance to a tyrannical government would do any good. The case can be somewhat persuasive if you disregard a rights-based argumentation for gun ownership and take a purely utilitarian POV. It's very likely that a government would simply mow resisters down with superior firepower. But what sickens me is the sheer glee on display when pointing this out. It's as though seeing these redneck wannabe Minutemen get their bloody comeuppance is worth living in a country that would do that to its citizens. They ignore that if the country has taken that turn, things probably aren't going too well for them, either, but damn do they get a hard on thinking about it. My guess is that they know that they don't have it within them to resist an oppressive gov't and want to be reassured that they took the right course because they'd still be alive. I might high-tail it as well (no one knows how they'd really react), but I'd at least know that I'd been a coward.
ridiculing the idea that armed resistance to a tyrannical government would do any good.
Yeah, leftards toss that one off all the time. Of course, they ignore the examples of our own revolution, and the vietnam war.
-jcr