Is the Phrase ‘Trigger Pullers’ Really Woke-Speak?

Seattle’s interim police chief Andre Sayles has been ruthlessly mocked this week for referring to “trigger pullers” when discussing plans to proactively attack violent crime in the city. As the New York Post reports, a lot of folks have accused Sayles of using woke terminology instead of referring to “shooters.” 

“Are they doing anything about the shootings themselves or just making sure they don’t overstep boundaries with criminals?” one X user wondered.

“You still got shot either way, the word choice didn’t stop it,” another commenter pointed out.

One poster chimed in with some additional mock suggestions for renamed criminal acts.

“Additionally, they will now refer to cannibals as ‘alternative-protein enthusiasts,’ looters as ‘unlicensed wealth redistributors,’ arsonists as ‘freelance urban-renewal specialists,’ and murderers as ‘life-expectancy adjusters.’”

The Post called the phrase a “baffling neologism,” and tried to tie the chief’s verbiage to the far-left politics of Seattle’s socialist mayor Katie Wilson. 

I’m contemptuous of Orwellian doublespeak as well, but I don’t think the phrase “trigger puller” is actually woke. For one thing, it’s been used by law enforcement for well over a decade, including officials in the Trump administration. 

A 2014 press release from the U.S. Attorney in Alabama, for instance, referred to the “trigger pullers and street-level drug dealers” who were targeted by federal authorities in Elmore County. 

In 2017, FBI Special Agent in Charge Michael Anderson, who headed up the agency’s Chicago field office, said his agents were “interested in identifying trigger-pullers and shot-callers.”

That same year, the DOJ released a report entitled “The Detroit One Violent Crime Reduction Initiative: How It Works and How Similar Programs May Benefit Your District.” In it, the authors (both DOJ attorneys) said that “priority offenders” are known colloquially as “trigger pullers.” That group was defined as “individuals who had committed, were committing, or were most likely to commit a crime while using or shooting a firearm.” 

By working together and utilizing their combined intelligence to identify the most significant “trigger pullers,” law enforcement agencies could efficiently allocate their time and resources to investigate some of the most dangerous individuals in the city.

In 2020, John R. Lausch, Jr., who was then the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, talked about the Trump administration’s crime-fighting strategies in Chicago, and said ““Despite a global health crisis that continues to impact the criminal justice system, our office has maintained or exceeded its recent levels of prosecutions of violent criminals, including trigger-pullers, carjackers, and those who illegally use and possess firearms.”

In 2022, the head of the U.S. Marshals referred to “trigger pullers” as repeat violent offenders. 

“I believe that if you are focusing on those who create the most violence that are responsible for the most violence, two things end up happening. One, you do remove trigger pullers off the street, those who are shooters, and it impacts crime and violence. You also bring justice to the families that have been terrorized by them.” 

I’m sure there are plenty of other examples, but the ones listed above are enough to demonstrate that the Seattle police chief didn’t come up with phrase “trigger puller,” nor is it the invention of woke scolds who want to downplay shootings. 

The term, as used by law enforcement, generally refers to the small number of individuals who are responsible for a disproportionate amount of violent crime in their communities. It’s basically synonymous with “repeat offender,” though it specifically refers to those repeat offenders who are criminally misusing firearms. 

I think the mockery of Sayles is an example of trigger pulling on the messenger (sorry, I couldn’t resist). Sayles is the appointee of a socialist mayor, in charge of the police department in what is one of the most left-leaning cities in the country. Anything he says that sounds unfamiliar to folks is likely going to get tagged as woke. 

I suspect if Tom Homan had talked about CBP prioritizing “trigger pullers” or Kash Patel made reference to taking “trigger pullers” off the streets, those comments wouldn’t have drawn any attention from those who were quick to go after Sayles. 

And honestly, if Sayles is serious about prioritizing targeted deterrence efforts aimed at those prolific offenders, that’s an encouraging sign. Whether the far-Left politicians in charge of the city will actually allow that strategy to be put in place remains to be seen, but I’d much rather Sayles and the Seattle PD go after “trigger pullers” than lawful gun owners. 

Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their extreme gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun-grabbing schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.