NRA to Sue Arizona over Destroying Buyback Guns

[Death_of_Rats]

The NRA has collapsed into the PETA of the gun world.

[Kable]

@Czarcasm

A purchased gun is not a confiscated gun.

Spoken just like a gun grabber!

[Debaser]

@BobLibDem

When your lot applauds the murder of an unarmed teen as a defensive use, one doesn’t have common ground to debate the point.

Cite for anyone “applauding” the death of Travon Martin?

His death was unfortunate. Every gun owner I know agrees with that. But his shooting was justified. If he didn’t go around attacking people he would still be alive. It’s sad, but no crime was committed. I don’t applaud it and I challenge you to give a cite of any NRA member doing so.

[CalMeacham]

@Kable

No I’m not, you are.

This is turning into a schoolyard argument “I know I am, but what are you?”
You’re the one arguing that the police might be required to sell the weapons. You brought it up in the first place. The onus is on you to support that, not on me to discredit it. And it’s still an argument even if you don’t call it that.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Kable

Spoken just like a gun grabber!

So… it’s your opinion that a voluntary buy-back program is equivalent to “confiscation”?

[Debaser]

@Richard_Parker

I hereby estimate the number to be 5,432.

From wikipedia, but with cites and it covers both the pro and anti gun numbers

Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study’s population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Higher end estimates by Kleck and Gertz cite between 1 to 2.5 million DGUs in the United States each year.[1]:64-65[2][3] Low end estimates by Hemenway cite approximately 55,000-80,000 such uses each year.[4][5] Middle estimates have estimated approximately 1 million DGU incidents in the United States.[1]:65[6] The basis for the studies, the National Self-Defense Survey and the National Crime Victimization Survey, vary in their methods, time-frames covered, and questions asked.[7]

[Cheesesteak]

@Debaser

To better understand the NRA’s position on buyback programs, here is an NRA supported law being proposed in Mississippi if anyone is interested:

"House Bill 627, by state Representative Gary Chism (R-37), would prohibit state and local participation in gun “buy-back” programs unless the agency or governmental entity offers all surrendered firearms for sale at auction to federal firearm licensed dealers.

I wonder if we can setup a “gun squashing and buyback” program where local authorities agree to buy back guns that have been crushed in a vice. I’d be perfectly fine if those go up for auction to licensed dealers.

[Richard_Parker]

From wiki:

Low end estimates by Hemenway cite approximately 55,000-80,000 such uses each year

From Debaser:

Even the lowest estimates are in the hundreds of thousands.

So I guess Wikipedia disagrees.

(I was just making the point that talking about the range of estimates people have made is sort of silly. I’m confident I could find some fly-by-night study putting the number below 10,000. You’re better off just arguing–incorrectly in my view–that the 100,000+ estimates are the more rigorous ones.)

[Jack_Batty]

Defensive Gun Use stats are bullshit, because they are self-reported. Any pants-pissy pussy who whips out his gun to use the butt of it point the produce section to a couple of sketchy looking characters can report a “Defensive Gun Use,” because if he has a gun – it’s for defense. Ipso facto, abracadabra, yabba-dabba-doo. Simple as that.

[CalMeacham]

@Cheesesteak

I wonder if we can setup a “gun squashing and buyback” program where local authorities agree to buy back guns that have been crushed in a vice. I’d be perfectly fine if those go up for auction to licensed dealers.

Nitpick – you can crush a gun in a Vise

Yahoo Image Search

…but you can’t crush it in a Vice.

[Debaser]

I’m trying to find the NRA’s stance on buyback programs and it seems like it certainly isn’t high on their list. They have 28 issues listed on the NRA-ILA page, and this isn’t on of them.

NRA-ILA

They do say this regarding the program in DE:

Tomorrow at 1:30 p.m., the House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee will hear Senate Bill 25. This legislation would give your hard-earned tax dollars to police and community groups to implement a gun “buy-back” program – misnamed since we did not buy our firearms from the government. While proponents of this bill claim it will reduce crime in Delaware, it will only serve as another drain on taxpayer money that could be better used by police to enforce current law. The average person who voluntarily surrenders a firearm to police is not a criminal and the firearms surrendered are not those misused by criminals.

So the argument isn’t so much that gun buybacks should never occur, but that taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be used to pay for them. This I agree with. They don’t attract criminals. No criminal would willingly walk into a police station with their murder weapon with five bodies on it and trust the “no questions asked” policy.

[Aquadementia]

A gun owner should have the right to sell their property to a responsible party knowing that they will destroy the gun in a safe way.

The NRA is doing their best to trample on the rights of gun owners to do with their property as they wish so they can protect the guns themselves.

The NRA’s credibility is shot.

[Richard_Parker]

@Jack_Batty

Defensive Gun Use stats are bullshit, because they are self-reported. Any pants-pissy pussy who whips out his gun to use the butt of it point the produce section to a couple of sketchy looking characters can report a “Defensive Gun Use,” because if he has a gun – it’s for defense. Ipso facto, abracadabra, yabba-dabba-doo. Simple as that.

Which is among the pointsHemenway makes. Using the same extrapolation techniques that the high-end estimates use, 1.2 million Americans believe they’ve personally had contact with E.T.

[BobLibDem]

Regarding defensive gun use:

Even though the only “evidence” submitted was the self-serving accounts of the shooters, of the incidents in which descriptions of the incident were provided, over half were rated as probably illegal by a majority of the judges. The Harvard researchers also found over two thirds of the self-defense gun incidents were reported by only six respondents, with three respondents claiming fifty, twenty and fifteen self-defense uses of guns each within the previous five years. Clearly there were more than a few “make my day” defensive gun uses being counted. Somewhat understating the matter, the Harvard research team observed that “many reported self defense gun uses from a respondent creates a suspicion that the uses may be aggressive rather than defensive.”

This is not to deny that some gun carriers take their responsibilities seriously. Nor is it to deny that guns can be used successfully in self-defense. But, according to the FBI, of the approximately 11,000 gun homicides every year, on average less than 300 are justifiable self-defense killings. The research tells us that what is happening in the real world bears no resemblance to the NRA’s imaginary world.

Not sure where the author got his FBI stat from, but I will of course share it if I find it.

[Debaser]

@Richard_Parker

(I was just making the point that talking about the range of estimates people have made is sort of silly. I’m confident I could find some fly-by-night study putting the number below 10,000. You’re better off just arguing–incorrectly in my view–that the 100,000+ estimates are the more rigorous ones.)

Nitpick noted. Either way, the number is certainly very high. Gun murders are higher because guns exist, obviously. But overall crime is lower because they do. Further, since most gun deaths are either suicides or gang related shootings, law abiding citizens are much safer because of the existence of guns.

It’s all a moot point anyway. Even if I agreed with anti gunners that guns were a net negative as far as safety I’d still be against banning them. There are millions of them out there and they aren’t going away. You can’t put that Genie back in the bottle. All a ban would accomplish is disarming law abiding citizens like me and the criminals would be emboldened and still armed.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Debaser

I’m trying to find the NRA’s stance on buyback programs and it seems like it certainly isn’t high on their list. They have 28 issues listed on the NRA-ILA page, and this isn’t on of them.

NRA-ILA

They do say this regarding the program in DE:

So the argument isn’t so much that gun buybacks should never occur, but that taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be used to pay for them. This I agree with. They don’t attract criminals. No criminal would willingly walk into a police station with their murder weapon with five bodies on it and trust the “no questions asked” policy.

No law abiding citizen would willingly surrender a legal firearm for $20 (or a pair of sneakers, which I understand is the going rate in Florida).

Are their bill summaries *usually *written by idiots, by the way? Because that one is astonishingly silly for a seriously lobbying group.

[Debaser]

@Aquadementia

A gun owner should have the right to sell their property to a responsible party knowing that they will destroy the gun in a safe way.

Why? It’s great that you feel this way, but can you make an argument as to the merits of this “right”?

[Drunky_Smurf]

@Czarcasm

It is the NRA’s positition that gun buyback programs don’t work, which ties in perfectly with the NRA’s policy to make sure they don’t work by sabotaging them whenever possible.

Except that they don’t do that whenever possible. Both L.A. and San Diego had gun buy back programs last month. Not a peep from the NRA.

[Richard_Parker]

@Debaser

Nitpick noted. Either way, the number is certainly very high.

Not quite a nitpick. There’s a big difference between saying that even your opponents agree with you, and saying that your opponents’ methodology is wrong.

If you believe Hemenway, then you don’t believe “the number is certainly very high.”

[Debaser]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

No law abiding citizen would willingly surrender a legal firearm for $20

I’ve done it. Twice.

I love it when I get to play the old “my post is my cite” card!

I had two old shotguns. One was break open and the other was bolt action. They were given to me by a family member who had no idea what to do with them. I determined that they would shoot fine but I didn’t have anything to do with them and didn’t want to go through the trouble of storing them (no room to safely lock them up).

So I went to a gun store and took $20 for each of them.

If you want another example there is a group in IL that collects old non-working guns to turn them in for gift cards whenever there is a Chicago buy back program. They raise thousands for their kids shooting programs doing this.

I suspect that’s most of the guns turned in with these programs: Old, non-working junk that isn’t worth selling.