Saturday, November 14, 2009

The Newark Gun Buy-Back

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports on the results of the latest gun buy-back program in the Garden State.


A gun-buyback program has turned into a local version of "cash for clunkers."

Newark police say the 280 guns turned in Wednesday and yesterday, the first two days, have temporarily drained the program's $50,000. Anyone who turned in a gun at Emanuel Christian Church was given $200.

A similar program in 2005 yielded 400 guns over four months, said Sgt. Ronald Glover, Police Department spokesman.

Four other churches were scheduled to host two-day gun buybacks in coming weeks, but Glover said more money would have to be found first.

As one of our favorite commenters often says, "words matter." I think he's actually used those words about this very expression, "gun buy-back," rightly pointing out that it couldn't be a "buy-back" unless the gun owners had bought the guns from the city in the first place.

But, that aside, is this type of program really as worthless as its critics say? Isn't it possible that among the predominately "clunker" type guns, there are some good ones which might otherwise be used in crime? Isn't it a small amount of money invested if even a few guns are taken off the streets? Isn't a drop in the bucket better than nothing?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

21 comments:

  1. This is one of the few times I wished I lived in the Volksrepublik Jersey. I've got an old Rohm revolver that hasn't been fired or cleaned in 20+ years. I can't unload it because the cylinder release is broken. I'd love to get $200 for it. I'd probably put the money towards a replacement gun.

    "But, that aside, is this type of program really as worthless as its critics say? Isn't it possible that among the predominately "clunker" type guns, there are some good ones which might otherwise be used in crime?"

    Usually what gets turned in at these gun buy backs are guns that are broken or unwanted hand-me-downs. In other words, guns that would be used in a crime anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I only wish one of these "buy-backs" will come to a town near me soon.

    I paid $80 for the last shotgun I bought and would be absolutely giddy about selling it for $200 to the cops.

    I would buy 100 cheap pistols for $60 each and be the first in line.

    Do me a favor and report when the next "buy-back" is scheduled for Oregon.

    Do you think I'm the only one with this idea?

    ReplyDelete
  3. MikeB,

    I challenge you to find one case every where a criminal admits he would have committed a crime if (s)he had the firearm sold at a "buy back program".

    One documented case anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What steps do gun buybacks take to prevent being used as semi-legitimate fences? Would it be acceptable if the Cash for Clunkers program accepted and disposed of stolen cars "no questions asked"?

    Is there any objective evidence that buyback programs actually get crime guns in significant numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sevesteen asked, "Is there any objective evidence that buyback programs actually get crime guns in significant numbers?"

    Just like I use my common sense to arrive at other opinions I hold to be true, about this I feel there's no need for statistics and surveys to prove that these buy-back programs make only a minor impact. The cost is comparatively small, though, so any good accomplished is worth it. But they're certainly not part of the overall solution, though.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The cost is comparatively small, though, so any good accomplished is worth it.

    Again, comparing to Cash for Clunkers--If there were no prohibitions on submitting stolen cars, would the costs be worth it? After all, you would still be getting a polluting car off the streets.

    ReplyDelete
  7. MikeB302000,

    You keep talking about getting guns that would have otherwise been used in crime off the streets.

    Yet you ignore my comment.

    Can you show where 1 time a criminal turned in a gun, stated that (s)he would have committed a crime if the firearm hadn't been turned in?

    One crime prevented by these programs?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have no patience for those who say gun "buy-backs" serve no useful purpose. Here we have an account of "buy-back" money going to a supremely noble purpose--gun rights advocacy.

    On Saturday, July 21, Chicago held its largest and most generous city-sanctioned gun buy of junk and orphaned firearms. The organizers paid $100 for each firearm, regardless of age, functionality or type. Turn in locations were situated at 23 churches throughout the city.

    [ . . . ]

    I decided to visit three or more turn-in locations to “spread” things out. You know, take five or so into each location until I ran out of guns or they ran out of credit cards.

    Now, Chicago officials would probably tell you this program is helping to get guns out of the hands of criminals in one way or another. Well, the average age of the folks waiting in line there was about 60 and I’m not sure anyone there didn’t have at least some gray hair. Heck, tne fella next to me was on oxygen and at least one lady had a cane. These were law-abiding folk. Typically, they were there with a gun that had been in the attic or closet for the last thirty or forty years. They were not criminals or dope slingers who would use a gun to victimize anyone.

    He took all ten, including the starter pistol, as real guns. Yes, a cheap .22 blank pistol that might have been used at a high school track match long ago. Not my problem that he gave us $100 for that pistol. He was just glad and happy I could show him empty cylinders, as he was initially taking about two or more minutes per gun to check them (until I started fumbling and sweeping) and there were lots of folks waiting outside.

    They gave me ten credit cards and thanked me profusely, falling all over themselves to tell me what a great thing I was doing and I reciprocated, encouraging them to do it again!. I stuffed the envelopes into my back pocket after folding them. I noticed that she was pulling the envelopes out of a box which contained an estimated 200 envelopes. ($100 x 200 = $20,000 x 23 locations = About a half-million in support of this program from someone. Looking back, it seems like a pretty fair estimate!) Separate box for the $10 cards for pellet guns and replicas. Similar number of envelopes there.

    [ . . . ]

    After showing clear on all thirteen, Benny showed me to the "money table." Similar number of envelopes, only the box was only 2/3 full here. Another woman was busy making notes for each of 13 envelopes and putting labels on the guns. I sashayed over to the other end of the table and had a peek at the "pistol" box. Total junk. Pot metal wheel guns. Maybe a couple of S&Ws, but more likely, just patent-infringement guns from no-name makers. No modern semi-autos preferred by Chicago gang members.

    [ . . . ]

    So, Guns Save Life ended up netting $1700 worth of MasterCards from the event after those who split their donations with the club were “paid” in cards. The club has sold a dozen of its own cards to members for cash.

    The last five of the cards are going to be spent at Darrell’s Custom Guns in Cayuga, IN for two CZ bolt-action .22s to be given away to two lucky kids participating in the NRA Youth Shooting Camp coming up over the first weekend in August.

    All of the rest of the money (and then some) will be spent purchasing ammo for the kids to use during the camp for the rifles. The camp, located in Bloomington at Darnall’s, is the longest running NRA Youth Shooting Camp in the nation.

    NRA Youth Shooting Camps teach young people gun safety and safe and responsible firearm use. Kids get a chance to shoot shotguns, rifles, handguns, black powder guns, archery and so much more as instructed by State and/or NRA Certified Instructors (like me) and/or Olympic-level shooting coaches.

    It’s sweet poetic justice here for Mayor Daley’s Gun Buy Back.


    I actually tear up a little with the joyous emotion inspired by this heartwarming story.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks Zorro. That was a great read.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And once again MikeB302000 ignores a reasonable request.

    If the gun buy back programs have even a marginal effect, surely at least one published story would be out there, right?

    So, can you point to one documented case of a person saying they would have committed a rape, a murder, a robbery, a mugging except they turned in their gun?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bob, Why do you keep repeating such a ridiculous question? Who would ever say such a thing, even if it were true?

    "So, can you point to one documented case of a person saying they would have committed a rape, a murder, a robbery, a mugging except they turned in their gun?"

    ReplyDelete
  12. Seems like a simple question MikeB?

    Bob is asking for some kind of proof that these gun buybacks have any impact on crime.

    Funny that you can't answer it. Of course we all know your support of gun control isn't about lowering crime, it's about creating defenseless victims.

    ReplyDelete
  13. MikeB302000,

    Just applying your logic here.

    If it doesn't make the newspapers then it must not be happening right?

    Heck, I'll open it up even further.

    Can you point to one verified study showing that gun buy back programs have been effective at reducing crime?

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Can you point to one verified study showing that gun buy back programs have been effective at reducing crime?"

    I'd be fascinated by what Mike could come up along those lines, too, Bob. Even the rabidly anti-gun Gun Goobers admit that "buy backs" are little more than symbolism. The message, apparently, is that the anti-gun clowns have so much money backing them that they can afford to spend it idiotically.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't know what's wrong with you guys. When you get onto something it's very hard for you to get off it.

    Upthread, the fifth comment contained this from yours truly.

    "I feel there's no need for statistics and surveys to prove that these buy-back programs make only a minor impact."

    I said that before Bob's thrice repeated challenge and before Mike W. and Zorro got into the act.

    By the tone of your questions, you'd think I'd said "these buyback programs are an unqualified success and save untold numbers of lives." I never said anything like that.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "I feel there's no need for statistics and surveys to prove that these buy-back programs make only a minor impact."

    Shorter MikeB

    I FEEL that gun buybacks are a good thing and how dare you ask for proof of their efficacy. Feelings trump facts! Period!

    or perhaps even shorter version of MikeB.

    Ewww, Icky facts. I can't use facts!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mike W., You're still not listening. I'll feed you even a smaller piece of the quote.

    "these buy-back programs make only a minor impact."

    I agreed from the beginning that they make only a MINOR IMPACT.

    ReplyDelete
  18. MikeB,

    You said in the top post
    Isn't it a small amount of money invested if even a few guns are taken off the streets? Isn't a drop in the bucket better than nothing?

    I'm asking for any evidence, any thing to prove that they take even a few guns off the street.

    Even one crime?

    I'm not talking about statistical evidence of a fifteen percent drop.

    I started with just one crime that was all I wanted.

    Then asking for one studying showing the "buy backs" made a difference.

    Not a huge difference but just any improvement. Haven't been able to find anything.

    So, should we support programs that spend thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars and don't reduce crime one bit?

    ReplyDelete
  19. "I agreed from the beginning that they make only a MINOR IMPACT.

    I never said otherwise Mike. Your problem is that you take offense to being asked to prove the efficacy of said restrictions.

    Bob asked a simple question and you can't answer it. Surely if they had a positive impact (minor or otherwise) you'd have something, some shred of proof to back up your claim that they reduce gun crime.

    Why is it you have no facts to back yourself up?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bob asks, "So, should we support programs that spend thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars and don't reduce crime one bit?"

    My question is why do you oppose it so strenuously?

    I don't have "proof" that any single gun turned in would have been used in a crime. Am I supposed to come up with proof of a future event? I thought you didn't like when I did that?

    With a tiny bit of common sense and honesty, you can figure on this. From among the hundreds of guns turned in, you've got that occasional one delivered to the cops by the mother or grandmother of a teenage gang member. There could be many variations on this, but the result is that most likely some of these guns end up reducing crime. Why are you so against it?

    ReplyDelete
  21. MikeB302000,

    Read your own comments.

    We've covered this about a dozen times already. We've talked about why we are against this here and other places.

    Do you have such reading comprehension problems you can't get it or are you just trolling for hits?

    Let's see if I can use an analogy you can understand.

    With a tiny bit of common sense and honesty, you can figure on this. From among the hundreds of criminals executed you've got that occasional one that would have gotten out and committed another crime. There could be many variations on this, but the result is that most likely some of these executions end up reducing crime. Why are you so against it?

    ReplyDelete