LA holds gun buyback early after Connecticut school shooting

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

  • 4

    smithinjapan

    Awesome. Now get these going, permanently, in every city of every state in the US. The only odd thing about this is the people protesting it.

  • -2

    observerhere

    NRA will file a case against the mayor for denying the citizens of its rights LOL

  • 1

    Elbuda Mexicano

    But a couple of pro-gun activists also turned out to protest against the Gun Buyback Program organized in traditionally liberal Los Angeles, trying to dissuade owners from giving in weapons to be destroyed. Protesting???? Protesting against COMMON SENSE!!?? Idiots!!

  • 4

    globalwatcher

    This movement is spreading all over US. My city is going to do this too. Just about time.

  • -4

    TheQuestion

    Gun buybacks are a proven and well documented failure. DC and Detroit virtually pioneered the practice in its modern form in addition to writing some of the most restrictive firearm legislation in the country and their gun crime rates have either remained high or even gone higher while gun crime rate in the rest of the US has gone down considerably.

    The reasons being that almost all of the buyback guns are either old or non-functioning. These are hand-me-down or estate guns that people have accumulated over the years from friends or relatives that they have no use for or require expensive repairs. Modern, functional rifles and handguns are in the minority of weapons found at these events considering such weapons can cost more than $1000.

    The protesters are fools though. If a person doesn't want an old, possibly malfunctioning, firearm in their house than this would be an appropriate way of disposing of it. Considering how high LA is on the gun crime rate chart in the US despite heavy restrictions and annual buyback programs is testament to how small an impact they have anyway.

  • 1

    Disillusioned

    Gun buybacks are a proven and well documented failure.

    That may be so in the US, but it was a huge success in Australia. The reason it fails in the US is simply because it is not national and it is not mandatory. Justifying gun ownership as needing one for protection against other people with guns is just ludicrous!

  • 1

    TorafusuTorasan

    Best line of this article: "at least two separate protestors voiced their disapproval..."

    Why are they against the guy who doesn't need his house cluttered with a bunch of his dad's old rifles? Sheesh...

    The two protestors could have offered a few dollars more than the police and stockpiled the armory of their dreams! Uzis, Tech-9s, assault weapons with silencers! The only thing missing is Ice Cube to write a song about it...

  • -1

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    I wouldn't mind if the gangbangers and street thugs turned in their guns, I'd applaud that.

    " In the line of cars, one 51-year-old man…said he was turning in four rifles that belonged to his late father.

    “The guns have been sitting around, and there’s a money incentive, so why not?” he said."

    This man's father's rifles are an example of non-productivity. They're the least likely to be used in a crime. How many street thugs do you see toting a Winchester? None. The few actual illegal ones do need to be off the street, but there were some relics that belong in a museum.

    I wonder if there will be any ballistic tests to match against any unsolved murders.

    Btw, every car license and driver's identity was/will be documented by surveillance camera and facial recognition.

  • 3

    Laguna

    Waste of taxpayer dollars. Gun owners should be required to register their weapons yearly after they undergo a safety inspection at their owner's expense. Any weapon found which hasn't undergone inspection should be confiscated and destroyed.

    This does not violate gun rights and would get far more weapons off the street at a price of zero.

  • 3

    Athletes

    Every thousand of miles started from one footstep. Whether it can make the deep impact for the culture of conservative pro Gun lobbyists or it is a win win formula for starving Gun Owners. Instead of watching the big Guns with admiration from distance, it is right time for making bucks from them. Empty stomach with shaking hands can not make the fine precision shoots. Being unemployed and being Gun owner at the same time is very explosive like Dynamite.

  • 1

    TorafusuTorasan

    @Athletes--yeah, how do these starving gun owners/collectors justify their weapons expenditures? A really good investment to resell later for $100 grocery coupons in a California parking lot...not.

    That reminds me of the guy I saw selling swords out of his van in the SW U.S. a few years ago. Big "Swords for sale" sign and his life's collection all ready to sell. It looked like a hard job being a secondhand battleax peddler.

  • 1

    johnnybravo

    Gang bangers will just be supplementing their usual EBT incomes with this program by turning in broken non-functioning guns....

  • -1

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    " Waste of taxpayer dollars."

    This part I agree with. Using citizen-extracted funds to obtain unwanted anything(like the Cash For Clunkers boondoggle) is utterly immoral abuse of ill-gotten gain.

    Gun owners are already required to register their weapons. Doing so yearly with a "safety inspection " is beyond ridiculous and well past ludicrous.

    "Any weapon found which hasn't undergone inspection should be confiscated and destroyed." Here is your true agenda - removing weapons from the citizenry.

    I have no qualms with a person who does not deem himself or herself responsible enough to own a weapon turning said weapon in, a voluntary relinquishment, but not for publicly extracted funds. Nope.

    After thousands or millions of guns are turned in, there will not be a reduction of per capita violence. Study after study have proven that.

  • -5

    Deplore

    The reason it fails in the US is simply because it is not national and it is not mandatory

    Mandatory? That isn't a gun buyback program. That's a tyrannical government stripping away a right that US citizens have enjoyed for over 200 years.

  • -2

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    Laguna, I'll assume you mean well, and I'll go a step further and postulate you support less violence of any sort. Let's say such steps as you suggest are followed and would also be accompanied with high(er) licence fees. Cui bono? Those who can afford the fees, will. Those who don't will lose their Constitutional Right. Taken to its logical end, the ruling class will continue to be armed, likely better so, while the peasant class is made that much more malleable. You really want to go down that class warfare avenue?

  • -2

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    " I did't know you or anyone enjoys being shot at and killed."

    Wow, that's an amazing leap of nonsequitor thinking!

  • 0

    freakashow

    I think it's a great idea. Unfortunately, it doesn't work in the U.S. (as it would in other countries like Australia) because there are too many evil Americans and people with no moral code in the U.S. that would use guns in the wrong way, so that those who are not evil feel the need to buy more guns to "defend" themselves from other people with guns. It's just a vicious cycle that will continue until someone has the balls to say enough is enough.

  • 2

    Laguna

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa, I'm not talking about fees as punishment - just enough to run the program; and once a year might also be once every two years. The whole point is to increase accountability required for gun ownership, which at present is basically zilch.

    Some guy in my hometown of Costa Mesa just got picked up for possessing bomb building materials; when police searched his place, they found** 58** firearms. The article noted that the arms were impounded pending confirmation of their lawful ownership. If this guy somehow avoids a felony conviction (possible) and the guns don't turn out to be stolen (likely), they'll be back in his hands. Wonderful: The cops hate this, but there is nothing they can do.

    If he had been forced to account for his weapons periodically, it is likely he would not have bothered to possess such a number - or more likely that he would have done so regardless, and the unregistered guns would now be the property of the police.

  • 2

    Elbuda Mexicano

    Laguna is right on the money! All guns in the USA should not only be registered, but put some kind of microchip in them, GPS etc..to at least the police, the government KNOWS where they are, or where they SHOULD be, now they are running hog wild! This is just plain crazy, how many "good folk" legally buy guns to RE SELL them to scum bag criminals, drug dealers etc...??? Do we have any idea where these guns are?? Do the GUN DEALERS now have ANY legal responsibility now????? HELL NO! They just sell guns and ammo to anybody with $$$$$$, who they kill, or leave in a wheel chair, could be the least of their worries!

  • -1

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    Laguna, safe to assume you've never legally owned a weapon, and maybe never fired one. This person you mention is quite likely not within the current legal restricttions in OC. If he were, every firearm would already be registered. Current laws are more restrictive than most realize, but as has been repeated, those who choose to live outside of the law will do so regardless. How many of the firearms in Anaheim or Buena Park's varrios are legal? Nada.

  • 1

    Laguna

    1. How do I know if my firearms need to be registered? - There is no firearm registration requirement in California except for assault weapon owners and personal handgun importers.

    http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs#25

  • -1

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    Laguna, thanks for that info. The question of the legality of his weapons remains. Were there any illegal ones? Is he a collector? Bomb building materials includes many innocuous items, btw.

  • 1

    Laguna

    Herve, the case is underway, but it is nothing particularly unusual. Apparently there were some collectors guns among the 58, but still - that is a lot of guns.

    While helping my father clean his storage room, I stumbled across an unloaded Colt on a shelf next to a box of shells. He was a bit sheepish - he'd brought it back from his father-in-laws after he passed, had stuck it away and had simply forgotten about it. My kids, then not yet teenagers, were in the house and had full access to the weapon. It just seems to me that weapons need to be taken more seriously; requiring registration on an annual basis, for example, might have encouraged my father to simply turn the thing in and be done with it. (It might still be floating around his house, for all I know - and for all he knows, too: he's getting old and forgetful).

  • 2

    TheQuestion

    That may be so in the US, but it was a huge success in Australia.

    The Australian program cost over 500 million dollars and had no impact on violent crime outside of the ordinary drop over time recorded by all developed economies. The violent crime rate in the US has actually been dropping faster than in Australia. Additionally, semi-automatic rifles (the intended target of the buy-back) made up less than 3% of the buyback weapons.

  • 1

    serendipitous

    These idiots who say, "You've obviously never fired a gun" are getting boring. I'm proud that I've never owned a gun and never fired one. And the other line of, "This has been our right for 200 years" is also such a joke. It's time to ban all guns, except for those used by the military and police. If anyone is caught with one, then they should face harsh penalties. Yes, it'll take time and there should be an amnesty period but it could be done if more people wake up. Anyway, this buy-back scheme in LA is a step in the right direction. Keep going America. Prove us all wrong that you can actually pull yourselves into the 21st century.

  • 3

    SuperLib

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa: This man's father's rifles are an example of non-productivity.

    And now they are our of his house and there is no chance anyone else can get their hands on them, like a kid. Gang members might not be interested in a Winchester but I'm guessing a young kid might think it's pretty cool to hold and play with.

    TheQuestion: DC and Detroit virtually pioneered the practice in its modern form in addition to writing some of the most restrictive firearm legislation in the country and their gun crime rates have either remained high or even gone higher while gun crime rate in the rest of the US has gone down considerably.

    If someone can easily step outside of the city or county lines to get one we're always going to see high gun crimes. If anything the failures should show how the issue of easy access can override anything the government tries to do to regulate. If there's one statistic you should focus on it's the high number of guns = a high number of gun deaths. I haven't met any gun supporters who can talk their way around that one.

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa: Let's say such steps as you suggest are followed and would also be accompanied with high(er) licence fees. Cui bono? Those who can afford the fees, will. Those who don't will lose their Constitutional Right.

    You could argue that guns should be free otherwise people will lose their Constitutional right. Adding responsibility to rights isn't a radical notion.

    Taken to its logical end, the ruling class will continue to be armed, likely better so, while the peasant class is made that much more malleable. You really want to go down that class warfare avenue?

    Throwing out words like "ruling class" and "peasants" and "class warfare" isn't helping your case. You sound more like someone who is so wrapped up in protecting their guns that you are now unable to hear that some of your arguments sound like dated baloney. Telling me that you're petrified of the government doesn't make me comfortable in you owning a lot of weapons, just the opposite.

  • 0

    badsey3

    Does this mean they will be offering cash for video games and movies with guns in them also?

  • -1

    Xeno23

    Registration of guns in the US, beyond what already exists, has consequences unrelated to 2A rights, or "freedom", or public safety, or general legality that few understand. A number of bills in California, for example, were recently defeated partly on the advice of law enforcement officials who confirmed that the bureaucratic overhead would overwhelm their resources and deplete their staff from pursing crime prevention and prosecution.

    A collector I know, who specialized in Old West, Civil War, WW1 & WW2 museum grade firearms diligently registered himself as a collector. The collector database in that state was hacked, and thieves targeted those collectors. This fellow's collection was stolen; a loss well over $100K. The thieves used diamond-tipped disc saws and safe-cracking tools in well planned operations. Police investigating the thefts said it was highly unlikely these pieces would fall into gangster hands, but would probably go to nefarious collectors through the black market.

    A recent newspaper article in New York state published an interactive map of gun permit holders throughout numerous counties. The LEO fear in this case is that criminals will target those households for gun theft to supply the illegal gun trade, or use that map to avoid homes where they now know guns are in residence. A further investigation showed that a significant number of those points were out of date, and there weren't any guns on the premises. Others have said this can serve to inspire irrational fear in neighbors or their fellow citizens. There's the invasion of privacy thing too, and even many in the news media were concerned over that. (Just saw JT has an article on this).

    A recent gun buy back in Connecticut saw a historic WW2 firearm show up that was worth over $30K; a rare German rifle. The police told the elderly citizen - who'd inherited the firearm from her WW2 veteran father, that she should auction it to a proper owner, and they declined to accept it. Now, most of the guns turned in are junk, and should be treated that way, but as in all practices, rational assessments should be part of the process.

    In some buy back instances, collectors and firearm vendors have shown up to advocate checking to see if your gun is worth more than a gift certificate. They offer to assess your options if you're turning in a gun. I'm not sure it's legitimate to call these types "protestors". Police have been generally nonplussed by this, as long as they don't otherwise interfere.

  • 0

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    Two days after the Sandy Hook Elementary rampage, a gunman in San Antonio, Texas attempted to open fire on a movie crowd watching “The Hobbit.” Luckily, the man’s gun jammed. Even more luckily, there was an off-duty police officer who stopped that man with one bullet.

    When Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and five others were shot in Tuscon, Arizona in January, the man who wrestled the gunman to the ground before he could continue killing had a carry-and-conceal weapon. Said 24-year-old Joe Zamudio, who acknowledged that being armed gave him the confidence to tackle shooter Jared Lee Loughner, “I was ready to end his life.”

    Here is a list of potential national tragedies that were prevented thanks to an armed populace (as compiled by the Libertarian Party):“A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Miss., was halted by the school’s vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck; A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun; A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Va., came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter; A 2007 mall shooting in Ogden, Utah, ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened; A 2009 workplace shooting in Houston, Texas, was halted by two coworkers who carried concealed handguns; A 2012 church shooting in Aurora, Colo., was stopped by a member of the congregation carrying a gun.”

    These are just a few examples spanning 15 years. On December 11 a man opened fire in a mall in Portland, Oregon—that is, until he was confronted by another armed man who had a carry-and-conceal weapon. The gunman who had fired on shoppers then took his own life.

    If the people who prevented these crimes through the use of personal firearms were legally prevented from having them—as many liberals now clamor for—America would very likely be remembering a dozen more national tragedies.

  • 0

    SuperLib

    Yeah I feel so lucky that we're only losing multiple people before a brave gun owner steps up with his gun to take action. To stop someone else who has a gun.

  • 0

    Herve Nmn L'Eisa

    Laguna,

    " He was a bit sheepish - he'd brought it back from his father-in-laws after he passed, had stuck it away and had simply forgotten about it."

    That's just irresponsibility. When I had weapons, they were always locked up in a gunsafe unless I was carrying. As an owner, safety is of paramount importance. I had a friend, a professional collector, who had over 200 of various shapes, sizes, calibers, and vintages which he kept in a specially built vault in his basement. Only he knew the combo. He always had one or two on his person, and we hunted deer and elk together. That meat was deliciously fresh.

    I adamantly oppose irresponsible owners. With great freedom comes great responsibility. Those who disrespect or fear responsibility do not deserve the freedom.

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • Sales & Marketing Staff

    Sales & Marketing Staff
    Nicolai Bergmann (ニコライバーグマン株式会社)、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥230,000 / Month Negotiable
  • Social Media Manager

    Social Media Manager
    Nicolai Bergmann (ニコライバーグマン株式会社)、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥230,000 / Month Negotiable
  • Cafe Kitchen Staff

    Cafe Kitchen Staff
    Nicolai Bergmann (ニコライバーグマン株式会社)、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥200,000 / Month Negotiable
  • Cafe Manager

    Cafe Manager
    Nicolai Bergmann (ニコライバーグマン株式会社)、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥250,000 / Month Negotiable
  • SERVICE AND SUPPORT SPECIALIST

    SERVICE AND SUPPORT SPECIALIST
    SCALA KK、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥2.5M / Year Negotiable

More in World

View all

View all