# 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:** 16
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/301 "2013-01-11T00:01:13Z")
Hope y’all will excuse a dumbass question (especially if already answered)…but wouldn’t gun manufacturers and new gun dealers be\* in favor\* of the buyback and destroy? Wouldn’t that decrease the supply of used and increase demand for new? ---
**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 11, 2013, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/302 "2013-01-11T00:03:51Z")
It’s been raised a couple of times and nobody has really answered it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/303 "2013-01-11T00:04:37Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Hope y’all will excuse a dumbass question (especially if already answered)…but wouldn’t gun manufacturers and new gun dealers be\* in favor\* of the buyback and destroy? Wouldn’t that decrease the supply of used and increase demand for new? [shrug] If you’re willing to get rid of your gun in a buyback program, is it likely you want another? ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/304 "2013-01-11T00:07:50Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [shrug] If you’re willing to get rid of your gun in a buyback program, is it likely you want another? There have been a number of times I have gotten rid of something cheaply, then regretted it and bought new. But what I was referring to was that if these buyback guns were to be sold at auction, it seems likely that the buyer would be a used gun dealer or a buyer looking to save a few bucks _instead_ of buying new. ---
**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 11, 2013, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/305 "2013-01-11T00:41:05Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Under what specific circumstances has the law made such a recognition, and how do those specific circumstances apply to this case? Note your use of the words “can be,” which are different from the words “is always.” Just because it can be under some circumstances does not remotely mean it always is. No kidding! I think if you read what I’ve posted in this thread, you’ll see I’m very far from suggesting the doctrine definitely applies here. > [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > I suspect that in order for such a situation to be problematic, the cops must not be able to represent something along the lines of a rational basis for their decision, and I also suspect that there needs to be some coercive element to the whole proceeding. Why do you suspect this? Had you even heard about this legal concept before this thread? In point of fact, rational basis is not relevant here. And while it’s true that “some coercive element to the whole proceeding” is relevant, the whole ballgame is the definition of “coercion.” So that’s a bit like saying that you suspect the definition of commerce might be relevant to application of the commerce clause. Here are a few examples, if you find a way to systematically explain them, let me know and I’ll share the fame and fortune with you: [ul] [li]Even though the permit is completely discretionary, a state cannot condition a permit to expand a beachfront house on the owner agreeing to grant an easement to the general public to use the beach.[/li] [li]Even though a state can otherwise place any conditions it wants on use of its intra-state roadways, a state cannot condition their use on waiver of your Equal Protection rights or Fourth Amendment rights.[/li] [li]Even though the state is free to give or not give welfare benefits, it cannot condition them on taking a loyalty oath, or going to church, but there is a split about whether it can condition them on drug testing, or agreeing not to leave the state.[/li] [li]There’s a split over whether the government can condition money for HIV/AIDS prevention on the organization also advocating against prostitution.[/li][/ul] I could go on. The point is that contrary to your completely unfounded speculation, there is nothing that definitively separates these cases from my loans-for-no-profanity example or a money-for-no-guns scenario. We can come up with lots of potential distinctions, but none explain the entirety of the doctrinal mess. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/306 "2013-01-11T00:45:04Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Or they could keep doing what they’re doing and people like you can shut the fuck up about it since it doesn’t affect you or your friggin’ rights one way or another. Or they can just do my idea, which is better than your idea, which is why your so emotional about it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/307 "2013-01-11T00:46:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Taxpayer money is used to get garbage off the streets. Taxpayer money is used simply to **get rid of** a **lot** of things. Guns aren’t garbage. Good try though. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/308 "2013-01-11T01:14:21Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Guns aren’t garbage. Good try though. Sure they are: they’re a material something that someone wants to get rid of, which is basically the definition of “garbage.” CF One man’s trash. > [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Why do you suspect this? Had you even heard about this legal concept before this thread? No, and your aggro attitude about it is unnecessary. I asked the question legitimately. I appreciate your elaboration. ---
**Author:** ![random6x7](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8baadc/32.png) [@random6x7](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/random6x7)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/309 "2013-01-11T01:30:21Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Well what if Planned Parenthood threatened to file a lawsuit to stop the police from being involved in it? Would you feel that Planned Parenthood’s conduct was outrageous and pit-worthy? Kind of, yeah. They have better things to spend their money on than an innocuous program to help people get rid of things they no longer need. I also have no problem with the police being involved, because some public officials would need to be, and the police are ubiquitous and have a building and some employees already. Having the government (or even the cops!) get involved in public projects doesn’t scream “communist gulag” to me so much as “well, yes, that’s what I pay taxes for”. I’m all for them making it easier for people to dispose of the sort of things that you don’t want to just toss in the dumpster. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/310 "2013-01-11T02:39:50Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Guns aren’t garbage. Good try though. No, they’re not, they’re far more dangerous and far more worthwhile getting rid of. **That** is worth spending tax money on. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/311 "2013-01-11T03:00:25Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Property seized by the police \*must \*go up for bid? So when’s the Bales of Weed auction, anyway? I have some spending change? You joke, but the company I work for does have some cocaine (“street grade”, which is definitely not a purity level you’ll see in the Aldrich catalog) that is kept in the controlled substances cage that was bought from the police. Having to deal with Schedule I compounds sucks, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![kayT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayt/32/3633_2.png) [@kayT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayT)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/312 "2013-01-11T03:14:56Z")
[hijack] Every time I see this thread title I wonder for a moment, “Who is Sue Arizona?” Am I the only one? [/hijack] ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/313 "2013-01-11T03:25:04Z")
> [@Enkel](#): > > It benefits collectors who already own them. And, be honest. We’re talking about a $1000 dollar riffle, so any collector who really wanted one, could easily own one already. I’ve seen 16yo manage to save up for $5k cars just because they _wanted_ one. We’re not talking $50k items here. So when you said: > [@Enkel](#): > > As for collectors or investors… something that is rare is made more valuable when the stragglers are permanently taken out of circulation. So, I don’t see an honest collector having any problems with this. You really were just talking about collectors that already own one? And you were talking about honesty? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/314 "2013-01-11T03:27:44Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > You joke, but the company I work for does have some cocaine (“street grade”, which is definitely not a purity level you’ll see in the Aldrich catalog) that is kept in the controlled substances cage that was bought from the police. Having to deal with Schedule I compounds sucks, by the way. Why does it have it? What does your company do? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/315 "2013-01-11T03:29:31Z")
> [@kayT](#): > > [hijack] Every time I see this thread title I wonder for a moment, “Who is Sue Arizona?” Am I the only one? [/hijack] John Galt’s country cousin. She has an uncle in the discount-furniture business. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/316 "2013-01-11T03:42:17Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > No, they’re not, they’re far more dangerous and far more worthwhile getting rid of. **That** is worth spending tax money on. Thanks for being honest about the true intentions of these programs. ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/317 "2013-01-11T03:47:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So when you said: > You really were just talking about collectors that already own one? > And you were talking about honesty? By definition, collectors collect (aka own). Fanciers may admire and longingly fantasize about their special little snowflake of an armament, but until they put down cash and buy, they are not collectors. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/318 "2013-01-11T03:48:47Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Thanks for being honest about the true intentions of these programs. What, to reduce the number of guns on the street? That’s the opposite of a secret. No one ever suggested they do this because the city is hurting for scrap metal. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/319 "2013-01-11T03:53:29Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > What, to reduce the number of guns on the street? That’s the opposite of a secret. No one ever suggested they do this because the city is hurting for scrap metal. And it’s no secret to the NRA. Hense they are suing to stop it. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2013, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623/320 "2013-01-11T04:37:03Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Why does it have it? What does your company do? I’m a synthetic organic chemist. I believe it was bought as a starting material for further synthesis to potential new drugs, presumably triple reuptake inhibitors. Cocaine is actually Schedule II, which makes dealing with it and derivatives of it slightly easier than Schedule I, but still tedious when it comes to the paperwork. You can buy cocaine from suppliers like Aldrich, but the free base is about $420 a gram. Aldrich specs it at 98% by titration and 97% by HPLC. My guess, however, is that if you’re going to do any real research on cocaine analogs it’d probably be cheaper to buy material that was confiscated, learn what it was cut with, and purify before use if needed. That should be all that’s needed for initial screening, where the target amount for synthesis is normally something like 50 mg per compound. Once a lead is selected, however, it’d go over to chemical development for design of a complete synthesis from simpler starting materials. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nra-to-sue-arizona-over-destroying-buyback-guns/646623.md?page=17)