Gun buybacks

Quote from DJPlayer : http://articles.latimes.com/2013/...k-20130122 630 All depends were.. it varies. But they almost always take non working weapons for some amount. Local politicians want some pictures a headline etc.. They don't want a story about getting 15 working guns.. they want a story about 100's of guns being collected (with no mention of functionality). just look at the best picture they could come up with.. I see a whole pile of rusty crappy riles. I can only imagine what pieces of crap these are.. This was already mentioned, but the people selling these are obviously doing so because the gun isn't worth the amount of the GC. If it makes people sleep better at night to buy broken guns though.. so be it.

Different buyback, man. Check the dates.

I look at it like a tax amnesty program and even though I am strongly in favor of fewer restrictions on firearm ownership, I think these programs have a purpose. Just as there are doubtless many grannies cashing in grandpas hunting rifle for Bingo money, there are probably just as many concerned mothers lifting and recycling their gang-banging kids' "misappropriated" weapons out of concern for their progeny, or simply kids or young adults who take this opportunity to unload a weapon that they know can get them in trouble as they try to turn over a new leaf.

Sure, there's is probably plenty of collateral damage as opportunists cash in and unwitting gun owners get ripped off and are duped into destroying potentially valuable firearms, and of course the whole thing is exploited as a political stunt, but try not to let those things detract from the actual, potential value of the program.

On the other hand, the Mosin-Nagin is clearly an "assault rifle" and I've seen them many times for like $75-$90... If someone was willing to let me dump them for $200 I'd be all over that. Really this program should be strictly limited to handguns.

Quote from VaporTrailer : Why are neo-cons afraid of gun buybacks? They don't hurt you at all. They serve a need. People have weapons in their homes that they no longer want and that they are more comfortable having destroyed rather than in circulation. It's their choice. Nobody is forcing them.

What about a hammer and a trash can? People can't destroy and dispose of firearms without a buy back?

I look at it as an upgrade program. $75 is more than halfway to a brand new Hi Point.

Why oppose buy backs? They are a waste of tax payer money, that's why. They don't work, and traditionally are used mostly for people to sell guns that would not be safe to fire or cannot fire. It's a feel good action, that accomplishes nothing. Additionally, such events may foment thefts of firearms, so that criminals can essentially pawn off firearms they steal w/no questions asked.

Quote from JackHandey : Why oppose buy backs? They are a waste of tax payer money, that's why. They don't work, and traditionally are used mostly for people to sell guns that would not be safe to fire or cannot fire. It's a feel good action, that accomplishes nothing. Additionally, such events may foment thefts of firearms, so that criminals can essentially pawn off firearms they steal w/no questions asked.

I highly doubt that this encourages theft. I can't say for sure, but it seems there would be no shortage of buyers for a $100, untraceable (to you) handgun on the street (hi-point notwithstanding), so if someone was likely to steal it then they would do so regardless.

Quote from Notquiteclapton : I highly doubt that this encourages theft. I can't say for sure, but it seems there would be no shortage of buyers for a $100, untraceable (to you) handgun on the street (hi-point notwithstanding), so if someone was likely to steal it then they would do so regardless.

But, this involves far less risk. Fast transfer/dump due to a legal form of fencing off the weapon, as opposed to having to find a buyer and risk a bust.

If the guns returned have been previously reported stolen do the original owners get the guns back?

Quote from onscreen : If the guns returned have been previously reported stolen do the original owners get the guns back?

In MIchigan the answer is yes, as long as the property was legal to begin with.

Quote from onscreen : If the guns returned have been previously reported stolen do the original owners get the guns back?

According to the details on the LAPD site.

Quote from JackHandey : Why oppose buy backs? They are a waste of tax payer money, that's why. They don't work, and traditionally are used mostly for people to sell guns that would not be safe to fire or cannot fire. It's a feel good action, that accomplishes nothing. Additionally, such events may foment thefts of firearms, so that criminals can essentially pawn off firearms they steal w/no questions asked.

FWIW the one I mentioned in the OP used funds from a NFP or other org (e.g. not gov't sponsored), however I'd bet these are the exception

Quote from skiman : Different buyback, man. Check the dates.

first sentence of my post: "All depends where.. it varies."

Quote from VaporTrailer : You're wrong. There are plenty of people out there who simply are not comfortable selling their firearms when there are no background checks in place... or they simply prefer to have them destroyed and out of circulation. You can spin it any way you want, but you're incorrect.

Not sure why you're trying to tell me I'm wrong. Cash and weapons were exchanged hand in line. Several very good deals.

And the officers that took home weapons. Never mind that. Wait, maybe they were lying.

Oh and the parts sold off crap guns on gun broker. That way the crap barrel and receiver were photo ready being cut up and melted.

Yeah,.. you're right, I'm wrong,... :eyeroll:

Quote from Notquiteclapton : Really this program should be strictly limited to handguns.

I don't see why. The big concern is about AR-15s and other "assault" rifles that are almost never used in crime. We need to get those weapons of destruction off the street before they can be used in another 1% of crime.

Quote from Deusxmachina : I don't see why. The big concern is about AR-15s and other "assault" rifles that are almost never used in crime. We need to get those weapons of destruction off the street before they can be used in another 1% of crime.

Well, I, for one, am glad we're preventing 0.001% of future crimes!

Its like govt "clean-air" programs that bought up pre-1970 "dirty" vehicles (how many of these are even still on the road???) while allowing car companies to make tons of new vehicles which get worse mileage.