Hmmmmmm. Gun buy back.

Is this one way to sucker some into letting LEOs know you have firearms?

http://dailymail.com/News/Kanawha/201008160866

IMHO gun buy backs typically get this:

1) People who are in need of $
2) Guns which are not safe enough to fire, and should be replaced, or destroyed
3) A "goody goody" feeling the Cops are doing something to make the streets "safer."

In no way does a gun buy actually disarms a criminal. It just disarms the poor, law abiding citizen, in need.

HvyMtl said:

IMHO gun buy backs typically get this:

1) People who are in need of $
2) Guns which are not safe enough to fire, and should be replaced, or destroyed
3) A "goody goody" feeling the Cops are doing something to make the streets "safer."

In no way does a gun buy actually disarms a criminal. It just disarms the poor, law abiding citizen, in need.

Click to expand...

Hear, hear!

In Baltimore, the buyback programs over the years have generally only netted unusable guns in exchange for money that (according to scuttlebutt) has been turned right back into drugs, booze, or ??

I have an old cheap 22 pistol. Wonder if I drive to Charleston would they buy it from me?

Its the oldest trick in the book and dont fall for it. You will go on a register and bingo, the police will personally know you as a gun owner. Heres how we came unstuck down-under.

Government proclimation.

1. Please freely hand in any unwanted friearms.

2. We need to licence firearms owners to lessen criminals getting weapons and amunition and lower gun crimes. From a defined date, if you are caught carrying a firearm and are unlicenced you will be heavily fined or even jailed. The majority fell for it and most law abiding citizens applied for and recieved firearms licences.

3. We need to have firearms liscence holders register their firearms so we can track criminal use of said firearms. Again, most law abiding firearm owners who were now liscenced, registered their firearms, knowing full well they were known to have firearms.

4. The Martin Bryant massacre in Tasmania gave John Howard, the then in power and leader of the Liberal / and National Party Coalition government, and a publicly self proclaimed hater of guns the oportunity to enforce a gun ban/ buy back which he pushed through parliment against the majority of the peoples will because he had the numbers in the senate.

5. He knew who was liscenced and who had firearms and stated, hand them in or we will come and get them, and you will be heavily fined and or even jailed, end of story.

Are we safer now since the gun ban-buy-back?

Go to the Great Britain Thread, click on "Who needs a gun in Australia" and see just how much safer we have become for yourselves. What John Howard never realised was the fact that criminals would never hand in any weapons, including guns they posessed. Now that the majority of the citizens are dissarmed and defenceless, criminals are having a field day. Rape crime, increasing. Home invasion, increasing, Murder with firearm, increasing, car jacking, increasing, assult police, increasing, rob banks and armoured cars, increasing, assult innocent by standers for no other reason than for kicks, increasing.

Dont hand in your firearms, instead, buy one for every member of your family legally old enough to carry, and train the in their use! Haz.

Would they get upset...

... if someone walked down the line at the buy back booth offering $150 for the good quality pistols?