What's the big deal...

J

John/az2

New member
about having the PD's selling/trading in their guns?

So what if Buford had a gun that had been owned by the Seattle PD?

I don't get it. If that gun went through legitimate channels (except the one where Buford got it) how does that implicate the Seattle PD?

How would destroying the used gun have made a difference?

It all sounds like posturing and mis-placed responsibility to me.

------------------
John/az

"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!

http://www.countdown9199.com
 
The point is the same line of reasoning that the cities use to sue the manufacturer... If the manufacturer is liable for the misuse of the guns they sell to others... then the cities are liable for the guns their police departments sell to others... There is no difference... I think it's wrong for both to be held accountable for the acts of others... but if the cities insist on pursuing this illogical line of reasoning, then the same reasoning should be held against them.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
You guys are missing the point. The gun might have been used by the police to shoot a criminal, and as we all know, once a gun has "killed", it learns how to "kill" again faster and better. That is why guns from LE cannot go to dealers for resale, but new guns from the factory are O.K. So goes the reasoning from the socialists governing our lives.
 
There may be no _rational_ explaination, but there is an _emotional_ explaination...and that makes all the difference, for the opponents operate on emotion almost exclusively.

ANY association with a dead innocent makes people nervous and twitchy. The fact that a gun originally bought to _protect_ lives was eventually used to _destroy_ lives is too much for most people. (Compare it to the difficulty of selling a house where the public knows a murder was committed. Same idea: nothing wrong with the object in question, but mere association is enough.)

If you sold someone a gun, and it was used to murder, you might talk a good "user of inanimate object" line, but it would/should still deeply bother you. It's just human nature.

Also, fact is police insert a lot of cheap, good quality used guns into the marketplace, making it easier for people - including perps - to get guns. Supply & Demand and such. If they were destroyed instead, the general price of guns would rise slightly (esp. good used guns) and arguably reduce the chance of someone getting shot. (Also wastes taxpayer money, but that's a different issue.) A weak argument, but persuasive to an important number of voters.

You may well disagree with the ideas & implications (I do) but good luck fighting them.
 
My $0.02--

Only 1% of police surplus guns ever wind up in criminal hands. But of course the anti-gun propagandists and the media focus on this 1% and are only too happy to overlook the 99% that are owned and used lawfully. Additionally, the anti-gunners make the false assumption that destroying surplus guns will deprive criminals of firearms, while the truth is that criminals will just find guns elsewhere. Also, the anti-gunners see a problem in the fact that surplus guns are cheaper than new ones--I guess they don't want firearms to get into the hands of po' folk and commoners.

Anyway, yes, the objections are all propaganda, hysteria, and posturing. The bottom line is that the taxpayer will make up the difference if surplus police guns are destroyed, while crime will not be affected one whit.
 
Shotgun.... have any of them trained guns laying around? I'd like to have one... Have a nice safe to keep it in to keep it out of trouble until I'm ready to let it loose. Also have a question.... better trained the gun, higher the price? :)



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Bookie - I don't have one of those LE trained guns laying around, but I am working hard to train my favorite shotgun to shoot trap better. So far minimal luck.
 
No, No, No, guys you miss it all. once a gun has committed a killing, it is haunted by the ghost of the Killee. Then you can only use it with Blessed Silver Bullets dipped in Holy water.

I hope I never get a gun owned by Bill Klinton, no telling where it has been!!!!!.

------------------
10MM Magnum.... tried the rest, now I got the best
 
A bit more seriously, guys, the PDs of at least some of the cities involved in suing gun manufacturers have had guns THEY sold used in crimes/murders, I think the answer to the original question is that the shoe is being crammed onto the other foot. Why don't we sue the CITIES, guys, won't that be fun? Watch 'em squirm.
 
The points have been well made - this is more illogic. Ho hum.

But, our cities deserve this abuse in many ways - at least for those municipalities that are run by the bozo's that have sued the firearms manufacturers. They deserve to squirm. Really squirm. They made their bed ...
 
I wonder if any numbers are available on the number of traded-in police cars used in drive -by shootings or get away transporation at 7-11's and banks. Surely, if only one has been used in this irresponsible manner this horrible practice of trading in cars must be stopped. What if one of these vechiles was driven and hit a child? Remember, "it's for the children and if only one life is saved it's all worth it".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top