“It gives us an opportunity to state our cultural values, that we believe guns should not just be lying around unprotected, unwanted.” – Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles in Taking Guns Off the Streets, $100 at a Time [via nytimes.com]
“It gives us an opportunity to state our cultural values, that we believe guns should not just be lying around unprotected, unwanted.” – Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles in Taking Guns Off the Streets, $100 at a Time [via nytimes.com]
Should be ‘Wasting Taxpayer Money, $100 at a Time’.
Those poor unwanted guns. I will take them in.
Those two S&Ws look like they were planted for the photo.
What?!? Cops planting g uns???
I volunteer to take in some as well.
As for all of you that turn them in to be destroyed,
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
I though the gun nazi’s gave up on this foolish and expensive gun “buy back” idea. I guess to them an idea is never so bad or expensive that they can not through more money at it. 🙁
The left will never stop making pointless, symbolic gestures, especially when they can use other people’s money to do it.
Since “Godwin’s Law” has already been invoked this early in the comment string let me add this:
Aside from the TOKEN payment from the government, how is this “Gun buyback and publicly destroy” any different than Nazi book-burning parties?
Wikipedia:
“In other cases, such as the Nazi book burnings, other copies of the destroyed books survive, but the instance of book burning becomes emblematic of a harsh and oppressive regime which is seeking to censor or silence an aspect of a nation’s culture.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings
Huh, there’s more than a few rather decent pieces in that heap. That’s…atypical.
Yeah, you’d think with all of the exposure from Walking Dead people would recognize a Python and realize it would be worth many times what that buyback is giving. Sell it to someone who would appreciate it and it won’t be “just be lying around unprotected, unwanted” and you could probably afford a small vacation on the proceeds.
No Pythons here. Just a couple of Smiths with vented ribs.
Yep, my mistake. I thought the stainless one was a python.
Yep, mine too. As jwm pointed out below, they’re LLamas (Smith clones).
When did someone photograph the bottom of my closet?
I snuck in while you were feeding the cat…
Not all of those guns are unwanted. I wouldn’t mind the buy back program if they then gave them to poor people who wanted and needed them. Of course the buy back money should only come from donations. Oh and the program should be administered by someone other than a government.
Now that would make an interesting test case… I propose a call to action, man.
Can one set up a charity to buy n give away guns staying clear of “straw purchase” laws (that is, if yr not the A T F?) We’ll do a buy-back of unwanted guns. We just donate them to honest people who can’t afford to get one vs. melting into plowshares.
Let’s see … be an FFL, do “background checks” (covered by the charity), cover licensing, training n similar, and administer it as some sort of neighborhood mutual aid co-op, for people who have nothing. “Parity for the poor – when the cops are only minutes away, helping the already victimized not be victims again.”
The anti’s will come straight at it, because it’s such a pure test case. And it will illuminate what this is really about, because it is such a pure test case. Nope. No citizens should be permitted guns, even when they are non-violent and “we” can’t protect them. Even grandparents n single mothers living in sketchy neighborhoods, the best they can afford, are expendible n not to be trusted with tbe means to protect themselves.
To get an FFL, you have to intend to make a profit. Therefore an FFL would not be available to the proposed charity. (I think you could get one anyway, it would just be a big hassle).
The “strawman” question instructions clearly indicate that strawman purchases do not include gifts. Buying a gun to give it to someone else is not a crime. For example, buying a gun to give as a birthday present is not illegal in itself. Buying a gun as an agent for another person is illegal.
Agreed: I don’t think the four Smiths or the Webley on top are there by accident. Maybe putting them there, over a bed of “ring of fire” junk, is supposed to make uninformed viewers more inclined to give up the similar-looking guns they have sitting in their closet, where they’ve been collecting dust since their original owners died. Sad.
2 of those Smiths on top are LLamas.
What’s the give away, the vented ribs?
That’s the big red flag. But the grip medallions don’t match up with a Smith. Or the markings on the frame.
Colts use the left side blast shield as the cylinder release. Everyone else has a separate slide or button to open the cylinder. These have S&W style releases.
Being a S,R&Co fan-boy I can tell a Colt from a Smith from a mile away, but Smith and their clones, not so much.
Now THAT’S what I call gun porn!
The mayor of LA? Yoga pants Garcetti? One of the most out of touch overlords ruling over citizens? The clown that can’t/ wont even fill pot holes? The ILLEGALS best friend? Ask this little boy how many 10+ mag were turned in, when he and is corrupt buddies passed their illegal city ban. What a POS.
How do these buybacks work exactly? Do they perform a background check for each firearm transfer? Who pays the fees? Are they breaking the law?
Most federal gun control exempts states and municipalities from compliance.
Here in Virginia, by law, any guns from a buyback are required to first be offered at auction to gun dealers.
I also “believe guns should not just be lying around unprotected, unwanted” just like children, puppies, and such.
Comments are closed.