# NRA to Sue Arizona over Destroying Buyback Guns **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 9, 2013, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623 "2013-01-09T13:17:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/221 "2013-01-10T14:07:19Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Imagine if the police were taking part in a program to offer people money to waive some other right. Nobody’s rights are being waived- people that turn in guns still have the right to have a gun. How ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/222 "2013-01-10T14:07:29Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Imagine if the police were taking part in a program to offer people money to waive some other right. I mentioned abortion previously, but one can think of others. Your mention of abortion was off base. The Police aren’t set up in front of an abortion clinic. They aren’t interposing themselves as something to walk around, people are coming to them. As for the rest of your post, people freely selling an item aren’t giving up a right, they are \*exercising \*a right. Those people can turn around a buy a gun seconds later. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/223 "2013-01-10T14:07:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. But they’re (I imagine, without having read the pleadings) going to argue that the spirit of the law should reach to all used guns that come under the control of the police department, whether by confiscation or by “gun buy back” programs – that surely the legislature did not intend the strange result of forcing the police to sell instead of destroy guns used in crimes, but allowing them to destroy guns with no threatening provenance. > > They will probably not prevail, but you can’t scoff at that kind of legal reasoning too hard, since it’s the same sort of extrapolation that underpins all sorts of decisions I bet you like. I’m more a “letter of the law” type of person, despite your attempts at mind-reading. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/224 "2013-01-10T14:08:26Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Imagine if the police were taking part in a program to offer people money to waive some other right. I mentioned abortion previously, but one can think of others. What rights are being waived? The cops could melt down every gun they get twice and you’ll still be able to own all the AR-15’s with 30 round clips you want. edit: holy shit this thread is moving fast ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/225 "2013-01-10T14:10:35Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Return? Return what? Nothing was taken from “the public”. Some people decided they wanted to take advantage of a “turn in your gun and we’ll melt it down” program. > > What about that suggests a duty to return those guns to the open market? Because that’s what police in Arizona normally do with guns they don’t need. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/226 "2013-01-10T14:11:08Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Your mention of abortion was off base. > > The Police aren’t set up in front of an abortion clinic. They aren’t interposing themselves as something to walk around, people are coming to them. > > As for the rest of your post, people freely selling an item aren’t giving up a right, they are \*exercising \*a right. Those people can turn around a buy a gun seconds later. Take contraception then. Suppose the police set up a contraception-purchase program in which they paid $100 for a condom or birth control pill or what-have-you. Ignoring the obvious economic problem for a moment, would you have a problem with this? I would. I think widespread contraception use is good for society. And I have this crazy lefty belief that even \*voluntary \*exchanges can lead to lessened social good. It’s not a perfect analogy, but I do think it helps you empathize with the intuitions on this subject held by some NRA supporters. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/227 "2013-01-10T14:14:12Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’m more a “letter of the law” type of person, despite your attempts at mind-reading. So you’re not the type of guy who would have worked for the underground railroad? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/228 "2013-01-10T14:16:14Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > But what if the police got involved in handing out the $20 gift cards and processing peoples participation in this arrangement? In that case, the ACLU would surely go running into court to challenge the practice. And I think they would probably win, based on the fact that marching in a big rally (or not marching in a big rally) is protected by the First Amendment and the government should not get involved in discouraging people from exercising their First Amendment rights. Well, if the government used tax dollars, perhaps you’d have a point. If the police used $20 gift cards donated by a private party? Yes, the ACLU would probably still be opposed. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/229 "2013-01-10T14:16:50Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Probably me too, but I think a decent argument can be made on the basis of the Constitution that the practice in question should be prohibited. > > Imagine if the police were taking part in a program to offer people money to waive some other right. I mentioned abortion previously, but one can think of others. That’s not a decent argument. It’s a fucking moronic one. What right is being waived here? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/230 "2013-01-10T14:22:06Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’m more a “letter of the law” type of person, despite your attempts at mind-reading. Me too, which is why I say I’d rule against the NRA in this matter. I say that if the legislature wants to include buy-back guns, let them amend the law to say so. So… not to hijack, but what’s your view on _Roe v. Wade_, as a letter-of-the-law type? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/231 "2013-01-10T14:23:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, if the government used tax dollars, perhaps you’d have a point. > > If the police used $20 gift cards donated by a private party? > > Yes, the ACLU would probably still be opposed. Yes, and I think the ACLU would probably win, even if the $20 gift cards had been donated by a private party. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/232 "2013-01-10T14:27:26Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > That’s not a decent argument. It’s a fucking moronic one. What right is being waived here? How about this thought experiment: The state legislature of the 51st state, Brickeran, is debating passing a right-to-work law that unions oppose. Unions rally their members to demonstrate at the state capitol in opposition to the law. A private individual purchases two thousand $20 gift cards, and the police hand them out, advising the demonstrators that if they leave the rally, they can have a card. Legal? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/233 "2013-01-10T14:30:34Z")
The notion that some conditional government spending can be improperly coercive is not that far-fetched. I seem to recall a certain Supreme Court of the United States finding that argument quite convincing in a big case recently–something about how Obama cares? Granted, that case involved improper coercion of states rather than individuals. And, when applied to individuals, courts have sometimes rejected the argument (the government can effectively give doctors a $20 gift card if they conceal information about abortion from their patients, for example). But lower courts have held differently in other contexts, and it’s not clear that Rust v. Sullivan is the steady course in this area. It’s actually a pretty hot legal issue, since this sort of conditional spending is becoming an increasingly popular way for legislatures to achieve what they cannot achieve by direct lawmaking. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/234 "2013-01-10T14:39:12Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > It’s actually a pretty hot legal issue, since this sort of conditional spending is becoming an increasingly popular way for legislatures to achieve what they cannot achieve by direct lawmaking. Agreed. And how much the coercive issue – or the issue of government involvement – is vitiated by the addition of the private donor is also unclear. Which is to say that while I would rule against the NRA, I don’t regard their argument as utterly without legal merit. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/235 "2013-01-10T14:43:26Z")
Are you speaking solely about the merits here, or do you think there is some plausible means by which standing could be found? > [@brazil84](#): > > Yes, and I think the ACLU would probably win, even if the $20 gift cards had been donated by a private party. They’d certainly win, because it would be a violation of the [Hatch Act](http://www.osc.gov/documents/hatchact/ha_sta.pdf) and the equivalent state legislation. [QUOTE=Bricker] A private individual purchases two thousand $20 gift cards, and the police hand them out, advising the demonstrators that if they leave the rally, they can have a card. Legal? [/QUOTE] Of course not. You’re using public employees to effect political action (or inaction, in this case). See above. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/236 "2013-01-10T14:51:02Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Are you speaking solely about the merits here, or do you think there is some plausible means by which standing could be found? That’s the real rub in all unconstitutional conditions cases. Apparently the Supreme Court thinks that the potential subjects of such coercion have standing. That doesn’t make a great deal of sense to me, but it’s a tough theoretical question to solve. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/237 "2013-01-10T14:55:40Z")
The NRA’s actual argument doesn’t have anything to do with coercion, though. They are suing to enforce a statute which does not appear to have any provision for such suits (contrast, say, the Clean Water Act). ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/238 "2013-01-10T14:58:44Z")
I was just speaking of the general concept. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/239 "2013-01-10T15:04:14Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Take contraception then. Suppose the police set up a contraception-purchase program in which they paid $100 for a condom or birth control pill or what-have-you. Ignoring the obvious economic problem for a moment, would you have a problem with this? > > I would. I think widespread contraception use is good for society. And I have this crazy lefty belief that even \*voluntary \*exchanges can lead to lessened social good. > > It’s not a perfect analogy, but I do think it helps you empathize with the intuitions on this subject held by some NRA supporters. I would think that a public good is served by getting dangerous weapons out of the hands of people who don’t want them. Those gun owners are free to see their guns on the open market if they want to, and the guns are legal. There is no similar good for removing BC from people’s hands. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2013, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/240 "2013-01-10T15:04:24Z")
Fair enough, but wouldn’t the “subjects of coercion” in this case be the people selling the guns? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623.md?page=13)