"It's a little incentive. I have no use for a gun anyway," said North Hills resident Ron Domash, who got $200 for an SKS semiautomatic rifle that belonged to his brother, who was living in St. Louis and couldn't transport the weapon across state lines. "I'm going to buy groceries, I guess."
That's just one of the stories behind the guns that are turned in.
I think the reason gun rights guys object so strenuously to these buy back programs is becuase the programs highlight how damaging gun availability actually is. What could be clearer than the case of this North Hills guy who had no use for a gun that his brother left behind. Imagine how many young hoodlums leave a gun behind when they go to jail. These programs are a good way to clean up some of that mess.
Another interesting aspect of this year's event was the competition.
"Criminals are always going to have guns" no matter what we do, is one of the most popular and self-serving lies of the gun rights movement. Criminals will continue to enjoy easy access to guns as long as the gun owners from whom the criminals acquire their guns keep making it easy. Until strict gun control laws are applied, not just in isolated states like California, but nation-wide, the problem will persist. That's what gun owners want. That's what they're getting.The city faced some competition this year, as a local gun-rights activist group sent members to refer those in line with functioning guns to take their firearms to their affiliated gunshops that would pay them more for their guns.
It was unclear how many were enticed by the offer, but a number did leave the buyback lines, said Bruce Boyer of Sons of Liberty L.A.
The guns will then be donated to women, who will be trained to defend themselves, said Boyer, who called the city's buyback a dangerous initiative.
"This is a one-day amnesty for criminals," Boyer said. "If a criminal uses a gun for a crime and it's turned in to an anonymous buyback, that's crazy. But regardless of what you do, the criminals are always going to have guns."
There's a tricky criticism of the gun buy back programs that murder weapons may be anonymously destroyed. Well, I'm not so sure that's the case, but what are the complainers suggesting that it's better to leave those guns on the street?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
"Criminals are always going to have guns" no matter what we do, is one of the most popular and self-serving lies of the gun rights movement."
ReplyDeleteThen explain gun crime in the U.K. Criminals get guns. That is hardly a "lie". A much bigger lie is "gun control works".
"Until strict gun control laws are applied, not just in isolated states like California, but nation-wide, the problem will persist. That's what gun owners want. That's what they're getting."
Not sure I understand this statement. Are you really saying that gun owners want nationwide gun control? And further that we are getting nationwide gun control?
MikeB: “I think the reason gun rights guys object so strenuously to these buy back programs is becuase the programs highlight how damaging gun availability actually is. What could be clearer than the case of this North Hills guy who had no use for a gun that his brother left behind.”
ReplyDeleteI am not following how this example highlights damage. I guess it could be clearer.
“Strenuously” is not a word I would use to describe my objection. Though there are many topics of which I strenuously object, this I see as mostly as pointless, a waste of money, and a waste of police resources. So in that sense I object, but not because my rights are being infringed.
Question, would you object to an FFL setting up a “gun buyback” day? Why couldn’t Mr. Domash just taken his SKS to an FFL to sell any day of the week. A gun gets “off the street”, and we don’t waste time and money.
http://theintelhub.com/2011/02/26/first-ever-%E2%80%93-austinites-outbid-police-in-hun-buyback-counter-program/
ReplyDeleteToday in Austin TX – Activists were successful in buying TRUNKS full of usable firearms that would have otherwise been destroyed (or ended up in the hands of “terrorists” – as we have seen before how cops confiscate guns and resell them to cartels…)
It's convenient for FWM and TS that my writing is so unclear. They honestly don't know what I'm talking about so I guess they can't comment on it.
ReplyDeleteMike, would you please care to explain what your ideal world would look like?
ReplyDeleteIf you were made Emperor of the World, what gun laws would you enact?
I've tried to get Japete to answer this question on more than one occasion, and she refuses.
Perhaps you'd care to educate us as to what the anti-gun end game is.
Thanks.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteMike, would you please care to explain what your ideal world would look like?
If you were made Emperor of the World, what gun laws would you enact?
I've tried to get Japete to answer this question on more than one occasion, and she refuses.
Perhaps you'd care to educate us as to what the anti-gun end game is.
Anonymous, you quit picking on that poor Japete, she is having enough problems keeping things straight in her precious little addled life.... without you making her take any responsibility for her silly little ideas... leave her be she is just so adorable when she is befuddled.... bell ringing is hard work.
*Lost comment by anonymous reposted, although I don't have any idea what he's talking about*
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Mike, would you please care to explain what your ideal world would look like?
If you were made Emperor of the World, what gun laws would you enact?
I've tried to get Japete to answer this question on more than one occasion, and she refuses.
Perhaps you'd care to educate us as to what the anti-gun end game is.
Anonymous, you quit picking on that poor Japete, she is having enough problems keeping things straight in her precious little addled life.... without you making her take any responsibility for her silly little ideas... leave her be she is just so adorable when she is befuddled.... bell ringing is hard work.