BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today condemned Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and the City Council for deciding to destroy used Seattle Police Department firearms in a symbolic effort to prevent so-called “gun violence” rather than sell those firearms, worth an estimated $30,000 annually.

“This is nothing new for Murray, whose gun prohibition credentials go back to his time in the State Senate, when he sponsored legislation to ban so-called ‘assault weapons’,” recalled CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “But one feature of that legislation would have allowed sheriff’s deputies to enter the homes of gun owners without a warrant to check on how their firearms were being stored. When reporters uncovered that requirement, Murray and his colleagues were so embarrassed that they pulled the bill.”

Murray, a liberal Democrat, could not provide any supporting evidence that any used firearms ever sold by Seattle Police were used in crimes in the city. Instead, he told a reporter, “You know, there’s just too many guns getting into the wrong hands.”

“Dodging the question with platitudes is typical of gun prohibitionists who can’t logically justify their actions, or reasonably explain their dislike of firearms,” Gottlieb observed. “Ed Murray is a gun-hating extremist who is using his political position to wage war against firearms and the people who own them. It is especially egregious because he knows this is not going to prevent a single crime.

“If Murray were in private business and he arbitrarily decided to destroy valuable property because of his personal prejudices,” Gottlieb added, “he would be fired on the spot. Being in public office hardly gives him the authority, much less the right, to send those guns to be melted down.

“Because of Mayor Murray’s willful disregard for public property,” he concluded, “we are today calling on the State Legislature to withhold funding in that amount from some city program. It is a public outrage that Murray and the City Council put symbolism over financial responsibility. With such an attitude, he does not belong in public office.”