Problem Owning a Firearm with a “Body” on it?


PDA






buck00
April 30, 2007, 04:59 PM
This topic came up recently. I have a friend who owns a pistol which was used in a suicide years ago (non-family). He has no problem with that. Another friend said he would never want a firearm with such a macabre past.

Meanwhile, another buddy proudly showed me a German K98 with rough wear to it, and eagerly speculated about how many “godless Russian commies” it was used to kill on the Eastern Front during the war. He had no problem if the rifle killed people... and actually felt it enhanced the worth.

What about you all?

1. Would you have a problem owning a firearm that possibly killed people in combat? What about in the civilian world- murder, suicide, accident… etc?

2. Do any of you own a firearm which was definetely used in combat? Does this add or detract from your personal feelings about it?

Note- I am NOT asking if YOU used the firearm to kill anyone. Let’s not start that type of thread.

If you enjoyed reading about "Problem Owning a Firearm with a “Body” on it?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
imprezagm4
April 30, 2007, 05:02 PM
Interesting... I probably wouldn't want a handgun used in a suicide. However, I have no problem with owning milsurp weapons.

Omaney
April 30, 2007, 05:07 PM
Absolutely no problem... A firearm is inanimate and certainly not responsible for a fatality. I have trouble empathizing with those that regard “things” in this manner. IMO a firearm is just a machine.

scurtis_34471
April 30, 2007, 05:10 PM
Owning somebody's suicide weapon would be creepy, but I'd have no problem with a weapon that killed someone in self-defense or war. I know. Its not rational. Its a completely emotional thing. It may have to do with the fact that my best friend in high school killed himself (No gun was involved. He slashed his wrists and hung himself).

Carl N. Brown
April 30, 2007, 05:12 PM
a firearm that possibly killed people in combat

A soldier might have killed in combat with a gun, but the gun
itself did not kill.

Would you own a car that had been used to transport drugs
or teenage prostitutes across state lines? Such cars are sold
at police auction.

My stepdad had a Winchester M12 that had been a prison
guard gun. We never cared if it had been fired in anger.
What we cared about was, it was a Winchester Model 12.

Same with the Mausers, M1 carbine or Yugo AK I have owned.
The gun just executes, for good or ill, the will of the person
using it.

Big Calhoun
April 30, 2007, 05:13 PM
Can't say that I honestly have given it much thought. I mean, I've been perusing pawn shops for a good deal and suppose that any number of them could have a jaded past. I guess I would not want to knowingly purchase as weapon that had been used in a crime or suicide. I also wouldn't seek that information out as a matter in the final determination of purchase.

torpid
April 30, 2007, 05:18 PM
In all likelihood, at some point you have drank from the same drinking fountain that provided life-sustaining water to a murderer.

Cain R
April 30, 2007, 05:20 PM
I once owned a Marlin 336C in .35 Remington that was used in a suicide. The reciever still had the etching where the blood had caused the blueing to rust. Bought it because it was a real deal $150 and other than the problems with the blueing it was like new and I thought it would make a great little quad gun. Never meshed with that gun and always got he heebeejeebees when I took it out. Not only that, I missed a 170 whitetail at 70 yds with it, but thats another story. Kept it for only 6 months and traded it away as quick as I could. Rifles used in the heat of battle? I own many, suicide? No WAY!

littledoc
April 30, 2007, 05:21 PM
Why not?

The firearm didn't do it.

TheArchDuke
April 30, 2007, 05:21 PM
My brother knows someone who has a milsurp rifle (wow that's vague) with tally marks on the trigger guard.

I own a Mosin that was made in the middle of WWII so it almost certainly was used to kill some Germans. I wouldn't even mind having a handgun used in a suicide. My girlfriend/future wife would have a HUGE problem with it though.

She has her father's Mauser but refuses to use it because he died when she was 1 and she never knew him. She thinks it's a little creepy for some reason even though his death was not gun related.

Deavis
April 30, 2007, 05:22 PM
Who cares? Piece of metal, nothing more and nothing less.

vynx
April 30, 2007, 05:24 PM
Unless someone bonked a BG on the head with the rifle, pistol, whatever, then it didn't kill anyone.

I think the bullet does the killing the firearm is just the launching tool.

Seriously, people kill not guns.

lee n. field
April 30, 2007, 05:28 PM
I own a Mosin that was made in the middle of WWII so it almost certainly was used to kill some Germans.

If it's like my Mosin, it may have been used to try to kill some Germans. :) Quite inaccurate.

Dixie_Amazon
April 30, 2007, 05:30 PM
Not a problem. The gun is not the responsible party.

mcmoyer
April 30, 2007, 05:33 PM
I have a .357 revolver that my wife's dad used to shoot himself with. My wife held on to it for years (dunno why) then a while back she gave it to me to "do something with". Still have it in the back of the closet. It would be a good candidate for a turn-in program (some off-brand German item).

TheArchDuke
April 30, 2007, 05:34 PM
If it's like my Mosin, it may have been used to try to kill some Germans. Quite inaccurate.

In the case of my Mosin, the Russian soldier probably hit one German and then died himself while trying to get that dang bolt to open!

glockman19
April 30, 2007, 05:43 PM
My uncle committed suicide witha S&W .38. WE were close he was like my dad. I asked my cousin if I could have it as it was the last thing he touched. She first said yes then changed her mind. It's OK I went out and got my 642. The 442 I just bought and can't DROS for another 10 days was apparently bought by a young woman for $425. She took the gun home with a box of ammo and three days later sold it back to the gun shop for $225. The Manager of the Gun shop said she was young and had thinning hair, possibly a cancer patint going through chemo, and suspected she bought it to do something unspeakable, and changed her mind. I got the 442 NIB never fired for $325.

There's a story behind everything.

ArmedBear
April 30, 2007, 05:49 PM
I have some WW II issue guns, and a bayonet or two that match them. Also, like many people here, I have some old combloc guns that were used to enforce authoritarianism, and a Steyr used by forces within Nazi-held Austria on her own people -- MY ancestors.

I don't know specifically what the individual guns were used for. But my having them locked up prevents them from being used in any way that I find to be immoral.

It's my duty to keep these killing machines off the street!:p

DogBonz
April 30, 2007, 05:53 PM
My grandfathers 1911A1. He used it in WWII against a few Germans. If he didn't have that gun I most likely would not be here, so yes... It has some added value to me. Not because it has taken a life, but because it SAVED lives.

Plink
April 30, 2007, 05:56 PM
I have a bunch of milsurp guns. I know some were used in combat. Whether they took a life or not, I'll never know and it doesn't matter. They're pieces of history. I think I'd feel funny about a gun used to commit suicide though. One of my best friends killed himself last summer. The family knows I'm a gun collector. I asked them to not offer me the gun when it was released.

Jim K
April 30, 2007, 06:00 PM
Any military weapon that was in issue during wartime might have been used to kill. I don't worry about it. I have one gun that was used in a suicide. The man who used it borrowed it and when he got it back from the police he didn't want it and sold it cheap. I have no problem with its past.

In fact, guns used to kill often bring very high prices on the market if the victim, the killer, or both were prominent people. I need not go into detail on "old West" guns, or a certain Carcano.

Jim

Neo-Luddite
April 30, 2007, 06:04 PM
Not to go off on a tangent, but aren't 'modern' suicide guns usually forfeit to the government as evidence? I'm sure laws differ in diffrent locals.

That said, I really wouldn't want a gun some one used to off himself. I have several mil-surps. If push came to shove I wouldn't be too weirded out to use or own a suicide gun--but I wouldn't seek one out.

I'm sure there is a 'collectors' niche out there. Not saying its not interesting as a focus, but on the dark side. Like stuff that ends up in Hollocaust collections -- informative but creepy.

3fgburner
April 30, 2007, 06:05 PM
Let's see:

Of the 4 Makarovs I have, one (Commercial IJ70) probably does not have a "history". The other 3 are milsurps - Bulgarian, East German, Soviet. Then there's the Polish P64 and Tokarev TT33; FEG PA63; P1/P38 (guessing that it's a WW II top on the alloy Bundeswehr frame, from the markings); CZ52 and CZ82... I doubt the M48 YugoMauser or the Norinco SKS ever saw combat, but the Yugo SKS probably did.

I'm still irked that my father sold the WWII Mauser that he'd picked up in the Congo, without giving me a chance to bid. CIA trace showed it'd been used by the Wehrmacht, given to the Czechs as reparations loot, then shipped to Red rebels in [the Belgian Congo] / [Zaire] / [Democratic Rep of Congo] / [whatever it is this week]. That one had actual bloodstains from the last owner before Dad's merc buddy.

MrDig
April 30, 2007, 06:06 PM
Combat Weapons, and or MilSurp, well since it was a military weapon one must presume it was used in Conflict. I own a few MilSurp's. Unless there is a direct chain of custody that can be verified one will never know for certain will they?
Suicide? Most go into police custody and more often than not are destroyed along with guns used in Felonies when they are no longer needed as evidence.
Sometimes the confiscated weapons are sold to FFL's in other states, one never knows what was done with those or why they were confiscated.
On occasion stolen property is actually returned to the rightful owner. Much to their chagrin if the insurance check was already cashed.
This is second hand information from an older brother who is a retired LEO

mavracer
April 30, 2007, 06:14 PM
no problem I have a S&W 1917 army that was shurely in europe during WWI and it as a definite notch cut in the grip.wish it could tell storys

Soybomb
April 30, 2007, 06:26 PM
Sure, if you have any murder/suicide homes you want to sell cheap because they creep you out give me a call too.

ArmedBear
April 30, 2007, 06:29 PM
aren't 'modern' suicide guns usually forfeit to the government as evidence?

Suicide is illegal. The DA owes it to the taxpayers to get a conviction!

sacp81170a
April 30, 2007, 06:32 PM
I still have the bullet they pulled out from under the skin of my right thigh. It was nearly a through and through wound. Just missed the artery, might have hit the bone because the tip is deformed. I keep it as a good luck charm. :D

I wouldn't mind having the gun it came from. Likewise, it wouldn't bother me having a gun with a "body" on it, unless the crime was still under investigation... :rolleyes:

medmo
April 30, 2007, 06:41 PM
Nope, wouldn't want it. Maybe to purchase to resell to turn a fast buck. I wouldn't either knowingly buy a house or car where someone committed suicide or murder.

scurtis_34471
April 30, 2007, 07:14 PM
I should clarify in my case that I don't really care about history, as long as the gun is legal and I don't know about it. I don't blame the gun for anything it was used to do. I'm just a bit creeped out by the suicide thing. Personal hang-up.

EricTheBarbarian
April 30, 2007, 07:59 PM
wouldnt bother me unless I was a suspect. I have a small milsurp collection and have no problem at all, its quite the conversation starter to where the rifle may have been or what it was used to do.

CajunBass
April 30, 2007, 08:06 PM
It's just a gun and there ain't no such thing as ghosts. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

gunsmith
April 30, 2007, 08:10 PM
Then I would have no problem with a suicide gun.
Of course if a gun is possessed by an evil spirit that takes over my
body and engages in questionable criminal acts while doing so, then I would have to call a Priest and sprinkle it with Holy Water...:D

HuntCast
April 30, 2007, 08:18 PM
Kinda creepy...... no thanks.
Nothing wrong with it, but like a house for sale the old lady lay dead in for weeks, I wouldn't want it, lol.

thedpp
April 30, 2007, 08:19 PM
Surely that gun didn't fire on its own its just a tool that can be used for good or bad just like anything :cool:

.cheese.
April 30, 2007, 08:29 PM
I guess it depends on the circumstances. I'd have to judge it on a case to case basis.

I know my father probably doesn't care. He only owns one gun, a Smith 6" .357 magnum for home protection (which I don't even know if he can use properly :( ) - the gun formerly belonged to a Chicago PD officer and was his duty weapon for the entirety of his career to my understanding (so it would probably be safe to say it's been used once or twice ;)) - anyways, that's his gun.

He also owns a watch that was worn by a man while committing suicide (the guy jumped off a building). Somehow the watch survived unscathed. The man's family gave the watch to my grandfather (I think payment for legal services or something - although I'm not sure 100% of the details). Anyways, my grandfather passed it on to my father, who actually wears it every so often without even remembering the history of it.

Both the gun and the watch as far as I'm concerned, can be passed on to my brother. He's an anti anyways, so I figure it's the only way he's going to get a gun, and it wouldn't hurt for him to be able to tell time while he's at it. ;)

To be honest, the watch creeps me out. The gun, not so much, and I actually serviced it for the first time in 20 years the other night (taking a mini vacation at my parents' house) taking it completely apart and cleaning and oiling every part as needed.

If the gun had been used in a suicide, I'd probably stay away, unless there was some majorly historical story behind it. Same for a murder. I wouldn't want to own a gun that had been used by a serial killer, but if on the other hand, it was formerly Al Capone's, I might be overwhelmed by the history enough. Or if it was Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle - same. Although I doubt that's ever going up for sale.

ojibweindian
April 30, 2007, 08:29 PM
No problems, whatsoever. It'd be like owning a hammer that pounded nails.

Sharps-shooter
April 30, 2007, 08:32 PM
I try to avoid owning guns that might have taken part in an as-of-yet unsolved crime, as it might make me look suspicious and cause a hassle if one of my guns turned out to be a murder weapon.

other than that, I don't mind. I have guns from the civil war (definitely saw action, used by a cavalry regiment from new jersey) and from the revolutionary war era (not possible to tell whose it was). I have another that was carried in the Mexican war for independence. I love the fact that these pieces are part of history. I would feel the same about a WWI or II era gun, from whichever side.

Aguila Blanca
April 30, 2007, 08:38 PM
I'll admit to being more than a little superstitious, so I would not want to own a firearm that was used in a suicide -- or in a murder, for that matter. I would not, however, have any problem owning a mil-surp rifle or handgun, nor would I balk at a modern handgun that was used in self-defense.

Yeah, yeah, I know .. even in a murder or suicide, the gun didn't do it. As I said, I'm superstitious.

MrPeter
April 30, 2007, 08:43 PM
I have a russian mosin nagant m91/30 stamped 1942 that has definately seen some use, and I would certainly like to think it has ventilated a nazi or two in its day.

As for a gun used in a suicide, I would only have a problem with it if it was someone I knew who used it in that way, in which case it would probably have increased value to me, rather than decreased. If it was someone I didn't know, then I would have to say that although I won't say that I don't care that they shot themselves, but I wouldn't hold it against the gun, if you know what I mean.

in the situation of the poster owning the gun his father-in-law killed himself with, depending on what the gun was, I would encourage her to carry it on her. Someday, it might save her life, breaking even in a gun-karma sort of sense (take a life and save a life)? It would be almost poetic.

Damien45
April 30, 2007, 09:15 PM
Having owned 3 WWII bolt action rifles, I would have to say it doesn't bother me. When I selected my M98 I did look for "indications of fighting". Not because I wanted a rifle that was used to kill people, but I did want a true historical weapon. That make sense?

As far as the murder/suicide/violent crime gun, I would own one. To me, it's like "convict rehabilitation"....only, it wasn't the gun's fault.

03Shadowbob
April 30, 2007, 09:27 PM
I have no problems with owning a firearm used in murder, suicide, etc.. I am not much on superstition or anything of the the like. I have a .45 that my great grandfather used on the bad guys in the war.

Dorryn
April 30, 2007, 09:38 PM
Maybe im superstitious, but im definitely sentimental.

A good milsurp used in combat has a better story to tell than a never-used one. So that, to me, raises its relative value. No matter who it killed, death is a significant event. The weapon/"tool" used commemorates both the killer and the killed, without arguing right vs wrong. Like other posters have said, its just a tool. That doesnt make the act of killing less significant.

As far as suicide, if it was someone I never knew, it would be merely a footnote in the story of the firearm. It would be largely irrelevant to me. However, if someone I cared about killed themselves with a firearm, it would automatically become sacred to me. I could never then sell that weapon, as I would feel it was tied to the person who used it... i would probably mount it somewhere as a memorial to the individual. I think death should be sacred, just as the moment of birth is. I probably wouldnt fire the weapon again, either.

tinygnat219
April 30, 2007, 09:40 PM
I am a milsurp collector so I guess my answer is no.

Pitt762x54r
April 30, 2007, 09:48 PM
I have no problem owning a gun that has killed someone. Suicide, murder, or self protection.

I would also have no problem living in a house where someone has died, or a car, or living next to a graveyard. Just does not bother me.




My parents on the other hand, had their new house "smudged" with sage and cedar after they got it just for good measure. I don't know if it worked.



And finally, a good friend of mine actually hunts with the rifle that his grandfather used to kill himself. The bad part is that they never told him, and never will.

BrianB
April 30, 2007, 09:53 PM
Call me crazy, but I prefer new over used...exceptions being my heirlooms listed in sig.

obxned
April 30, 2007, 09:59 PM
It's just a tool.

Mr White
April 30, 2007, 10:09 PM
If a gun was used to kill someone I cared about, I couldn't own it. Inanimate object or not, think it'd just be too strong of a reminder. Other than that, I don't think it'd matter to me.

230RN
April 30, 2007, 10:19 PM
I think they used to call these "blooded" guns and knives.

I would not have a problem owning such a gun. I'd just do a purification ritual to dispel negative energy, if any.

However, many suicides are actually beneficial. At my age, I've known too many folks who stuck it out to the end, draining the family's emotional and financial resources. We've all heard the expression, "It was a blessing."

On the other hand I've known two people who took care of the matter themselves. The shock from a sudden death, to my mind, beats the long drawn-out agony to the family... as well as the individual. Another kind of blessing.

Ya makes yer choices and ya puts down yer bets.

rbernie
April 30, 2007, 10:19 PM
When I look at the Enola Gay, I see a B-29. Nothing more. It has no history, no morals. The history belongs to the owners, the wielders of the tool. The Enola Gay is just another B-29; her crew and their mission and the folks that put them there are the history.

I may like the history surrounding the usage of a tool or find it unsettling, but I can't pin that history on the tool. It's just a tool.

.cheese.
April 30, 2007, 10:21 PM
MrPeter raised a good point I hadn't thought of. Being Jewish, I probably would have no problems owning a gun that had been used to take out some of the Nazis in WWII. I might even get a feeling of vengeance and pride owning one. Who knows.

gbran
April 30, 2007, 10:23 PM
My ex killed her boyfriend in my kitchen with my Model 19 Smith. The shooting was ruled justifiable, though I doubt it was, but long story short, after some time, I was able to get the gun back and still have it today.

PistolNewbie
April 30, 2007, 10:23 PM
It's just a gun and there ain't no such thing as ghosts. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

:what: I have never seen a ghost, but there have been plenty of cable TV shows about people who supposedly have. Nope--If I knew somebody blew their brains out with a gun, it would give me the creeps to own it and I could never enjoy it. :eek: I know, it may sound crazy, but we all have our hangups!

Joe Demko
April 30, 2007, 10:27 PM
My hunting buddy uses a Marlin .30-30 with which his father committed suicide. The man was an abusive alcoholic who beat his wife and his kids. After he killed himself, the local police in that jurisdiction held the rifle and didn't want to return it. My friend was firm in his resolve to have it, though, and eventually did gain possession. He keeps it, I guess, as a memento of the only good thing his father ever did for his wife and children.

JCF
April 30, 2007, 10:28 PM
I think that, for a lot of people, when they talk about their feelings, or lack thereof, surrounding tools and implements of death, it has a lot to do with their perception of the magnitude of the incident.

Many would indeed not think twice about owning a simple inanimate tool used in a lackluster suicide. On the other hand, they might be less enthusiastic about owning one of the simple inanimate tools used at Auschwitz or Dachau.

Pilgrim
April 30, 2007, 10:54 PM
When I worked as a deputy sheriff in a small town in central California, there was a fellow whose father committed suicide with a Ruger Single-Six revolver. He persisted and got the sheriff to return to him the pistol his father used to end his life.

Not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, he carried it about in town showing it off to his friends and neighbors. His famous line was, "It's just like new, only fired once."

Pilgrim

greenflash107
April 30, 2007, 10:57 PM
I would not have a problem. It's a piece of metal. It doesn't have a mind of it's own.

thexrayboy
April 30, 2007, 11:00 PM
Too allow a feeling about an object and it's possible history to cloud your judgement about whether or not it is a legitimate item to possess is not good. You would be operating in the realm of the liberal blissninny who is only capable of responding to their emotions. A rational person will realize that the gun is in fact the object we all say it is. It has no motivations, ability nor agenda. It is merely a tool to be used by the hand that holds it.
It is no different than any other physical item that can cause harm and should be treated no differently. Do not fall into the liberal cess pool of emoting as a substitute for thinking.

fatelk
April 30, 2007, 11:15 PM
A gun is a tool, an inanimate object, neither good nor bad inherently. That being said, I guess I am in the camp with the others who say it would creep them out to own a gun used in a suicide or a murder. No logical reason really, call it a personal hangup.

If I didn't know, of course, it wouldn't bother me. I think mostly it would be creepy because it would always be a reminder of something terrible, not because of any silly superstition that the weapon itself is somehow haunted or cursed.

wooderson
April 30, 2007, 11:20 PM
There's no such thing as a "rational person" devoid of emotional interference. (Arguably, the desire for this rationality is emotional itself.)

I, for one, wouldn't care to own a suicide weapon. I don't believe in God, an afterlife, spirituality, fate, etc. (though I believe in chance more than most). I recognize that my distaste isn't cold, hard and rational - but it's my distaste, and I have no reason to attempt to change it. Objects are no more separate from their existence than people.

Nor do I buy used underwear, no matter how many times they've been bleached and washed. Hey, they're good as new, right? No thanks, not for me.

An object that, in the abstract, may have been used to kill? Don't carry. Kinda happy that my Mosin-Nagant might have killed a Nazi, really.

TCB in TN
April 30, 2007, 11:27 PM
Last time I checked none of my weapons can remember their past, until they do, I am going to just trust that they were "good" in their former lives and keep it at that.

Geno
April 30, 2007, 11:29 PM
You missed a serious "vote" or "poll" opportunity with this thread!!!

How many houses have "housed" dead bodies? The realtor, by law, is not obligated to advise the buyer of any dead bodies that were laying around. Why should a firearm be any different than a home?

I know, I know...I just opened the door to someone coming along with a "zombie" joke or retort.

Doc2005

FieroCDSP
April 30, 2007, 11:32 PM
The idea that a weapon "carries" it's past with it is only superstition. Superstition, however, sometimes leads people to believe in it. I'm not a superstitious person, with one possible exception. Despite the fact I've never been to the ocean, I would never, ever, claim that the sea cannot claim me. It's just one of those things you don't cross.

As for a blooded firearm.. I'd be interested in any gun's past, maybe even a bit creeped out by it, but I wouldn't decline a good price on one.

thexrayboy
April 30, 2007, 11:38 PM
There's no such thing as a "rational person" devoid of emotional interference. (Arguably, the desire for this rationality is emotional itself.)


A rational person is not devoid of emotion nor immune from its effects. A rational person realizes they exist, examines them for their value and relegates to them the proper value in a decision making process. A nonrational person will allow their emotions to affect decision making practices at the expense of truth and logic. Thus there are "rational persons" and "nonrational persons". McCarthy and her total lack of knowledge regarding barrel shrouds yet still desiring to ban them is a classic example of a nonrational person and their lack of thought process.

wooderson
April 30, 2007, 11:52 PM
A rational person realizes they exist, examines them for their value and relegates to them the proper value in a decision making process.

And thus "the rational man" takes into account his emotions toward an item as part of the cost-benefit. And an emotion that chooses to avoid objects with this specific history is an emotion without cost. There are other guns in the world.

The dichotomy between rational man and irrational man is simply false, they exist only in a platonic sense.

Kharn
April 30, 2007, 11:58 PM
Metal, wood and plastic have no mind of their own, its all on the shoulders of the user. I've never had an issue with any of my C&Rs possibly being used in conflict.

Doc2005:
The realtor, by law, is not obligated to advise the buyer of any dead bodies that were laying around.I thought the seller was legally required to disclose any known negatives of the house, including suicides/deaths in the house? Some groups (I think the Japanese were the main example in the books I read when buying a house) will avoid living in a place were someone has died.

Kharn

pcosmar
May 1, 2007, 12:23 AM
How many houses have "housed" dead bodies? The realtor, by law, is not obligated to advise the buyer of any dead bodies that were laying around. Why should a firearm be any different than a home?
My house had, in time past, been a Wake House. I weirds the wife out some.
I have found the ghosts to be friendly. Doesn't bother me a bit.

230RN
May 1, 2007, 12:39 AM
Thexrayboy:

A rational person is not devoid of emotion nor immune from its effects. A rational person realizes they exist, examines them for their value and relegates to them the proper value in a decision making process. A nonrational person will allow their emotions to affect decision making practices at the expense of truth and logic.

You're touching on the beauty of using a ritual to disassociate oneself from the negative emotions engendereed by knowing the tragic history of an object.

It takes a rational decision to perform the ritual.

Most people don't get that.

Blessed be.

Jay1958
May 1, 2007, 12:57 AM
My favorite example of this type of question is a typewriter.

Would it bother you to own a typewriter that had been used to type:

-- a ransom note?
-- a suicide note?
-- a bank robbers note?
-- an anti-2nd amendment essay?
-- a serial killer's autobiography?
-- a pastor's sermon?
-- a Bill Clinton speech? a George W. Bush speech? a John Kerry speech and a Nancy Pelosi speech?
-- Mein Kampf?

Beagle-zebub
May 1, 2007, 03:00 AM
Would you live in a dorm that was once a sanitarium for TB sufferers? Some friends of mine do.

SVT93
May 1, 2007, 03:57 AM
I might have a problem with a weapon used in a suicide. Depends on who it was though.

jeepmor
May 1, 2007, 04:41 AM
I have hammers that I've smashed my fingers with, they still work fine. Both the hammers and the fingers.

Same difference, equating the gun to the victims is, as the Larry the Cable Guy says, like blaming my pencil for spelling mistakes.

TheDisturbed1
May 1, 2007, 04:53 AM
If only I had an old M1 that saw some action... I think it would ADD to the value.. (Used to defend our country and proven to be a valuble Allied element with -xx- Axis body count). I would buy it.

Ala Dan
May 1, 2007, 05:01 AM
As I understand it, my S&W 642 was used in a suicide; and that is why
I got it for $200. This weapon was received by me, "clean as a whistle"
but with no box or doc's; as apparently it only was used too fire one
round. I don't have a problem owning it, as I did not know the victim;
but had it been a relative or close friend, well that might have been a
different story~! :scrutiny: :(

.cheese.
May 1, 2007, 08:35 AM
Beagle - does this count? When I started college, I lived in a dorm that was originally a hotel until a fire that started in the subway system below spread and killed hundreds both in the hotel and in the subway station. It was a little creepy.

Working Man
May 1, 2007, 08:43 AM
Well since a firearm is an inanimate object and does not store souls, I'd have no problem with it.

Bubbles
May 1, 2007, 08:43 AM
DH owns a .44 revolver that used to be a range rental gun. It was used in a suicide. They had a hard time renting/selling it afterward, so he got it fairly cheaply. It's got a lot more (deer) bodies on it since he bought it.

30 cal slob
May 1, 2007, 08:56 AM
two sides of the coin:

several years back, a college buddy of mine took his own life with a Benelli M-3 shotgun. the weapon was subsequently destroyed at the request of his family. can't fault them.

a well-known East Coast gunsmith showed me an MP-40 (registered receiver) ... with horizontal .30 cal diameter bullet holes that ran the length of the magwell. no one is certain, but it is possible the operator of that weapon was a Nazi shot by allied forces. who knows how many friendlies or civilians were killed or wounded by that gun.

on a related note ... frat brother of mine acquired a used ford probe (remember those?) on the cheap. the story goes that the previous owner committed suicide in the front seat of the car with a pistol shot to the head. a little cleanup and new upholstery ... and ... nice car with low mileage that NOBODY else wanted to buy at any price.

MustangHowie
May 1, 2007, 09:14 AM
If a family member died of natural causes would you want one of thier guns to remember them by? If it was a suicide would you not love that person anymore? My uncle recently gave me his son's .357 magnum that he used on himself twenty years ago. It is a part of my family history. The gun didn't make the decision to do it my cousin did. He will be missed, but he will also be remembered. Two of his most favorite possesions were that .357 and his 1968 Chevy Malibu. My uncle still keeps the car running and my aunt drives it around town so those who know will remember.

Zach S
May 1, 2007, 09:29 AM
Pretty much the same thing came up at corral.net a few years ago. A guy came across some good deals on parts and go-fast goodies for his mustang, off a wrecked stang, and he later found out that when it was wrecked the owner was killed. I dont remember if he got the parts or not, IIRC the thread shortly turned into the typical nonsense found in the corral's lounge.

In the case of cars, and guns (I need cheaper hobbies), it doesn't bother me. Most of my pistols were bought used, so there is a possiblity that one was used in defense or offense, but I dont think about it. Actually, I never have, until I read this thread.

Now that I do think about it: It wouldnt bother me. If the gun itself was walking the streets shooting aimlessly, it would probably bother me quite a bit until the meds kicked in. But it is an inaminate object, so why would I be bothered?

SaxonPig
May 1, 2007, 09:42 AM
Guns are inanimate objects... tools. No evil within.

I have one gun that I know for a fact was used in a fatal shooting and numerous retired police and military guns that may have been. Doesn't concern me.

junyo
May 1, 2007, 10:08 AM
Suicide gun would creep me out, milsurp is hit or miss; I won't own Nazi or Commie guns (maybe a newly made AK or .308 Saiga), kinda like the fact that at least one of my Enfields has bodies on it. I'm consistently inconsistent.

Dravur
May 1, 2007, 12:25 PM
I would own the gun as it is an inanimate object... but I wouldnt want the bullet back.

CSA 357
May 1, 2007, 08:35 PM
there was a colt 45 acp at a gun show a while back that a guy used to end his own life, it had some pited spots on it i tryed to deal with the guy , but i guess he thought it was worth more with the pitted blood spots! it wouldnt bother me ,but i dont think ill pay more :rolleyes: csa

El Barto
May 1, 2007, 09:15 PM
I would have no problems owning a gun that was used for a suicide and I'm sure that my milsurps have a soul or two attached.

The only time that this has become an issue is with my FN-49. My wife tells me that she gets a creepy feeling about it, to the point that it is not stored at our house. She tells me that she gets the feeling that the previous owner enjoyed using it too much, and not in a good way.

Orthonym
May 1, 2007, 09:59 PM
The gun Alice Sheldon (James Tiptree) used on hubby, then self, and the one H. Beam Piper used on self.

But then I'm an old SF geek.

Oh, and one more; Bonny Parker's BAR

aaronrkelly
May 2, 2007, 05:01 AM
1- I have NO problem owning a firearm that was using in the killing of another...it was merely a tool. Heck, I might get a symbol or "tick" mark engraved on the slide....kinda like fighter pilots did for downed aircrafts.

2 - I HOPE I have firearms used in combat, although I have some gun that are in the year range of WWII I can prove any of them where used in such. If I could I they would have more value to me.....not sure about to others.

Hillsideblue
May 2, 2007, 07:51 AM
I always carried a Colt Python at work as a Cop.....A four inch revolver..........

After I retired I wanted to sell the weapon and mentioned to the guy that wanted it that I had killed a bad guy with the gun in 1972..........

He just had to have that gun because of the history on it............I got about four times what it was worth.........Weird...........

sean m
May 2, 2007, 11:37 AM
I had a Charter Arms revolver that was stolen and used in a suicide. After a year and half I got it back, I loaded it back up and put it in the desk drawer for home use. That was the reason I bought it for in the first place as a defensive weapon. I just traded it recently to help accquire a Ruger sp101 in 22LR.

Essex County
May 2, 2007, 12:30 PM
I once bought a 21/2" Model 19 that had been used in a suicide. One hundred dollars. And it didn't bother me a bit. Essex

Sam Adams
May 2, 2007, 02:11 PM
I'm a bit on the fence...

You know, we're all recycled stardust. We drink water that has gone through the sewage system and been cleaned (think about that for a second or two), and we eat food that has been fertilized with who knows what. We all breath the same air. I'd be shocked beyond belief if we didn't all have some the atoms and even molecules in our body that some murderer didn't once have previously in their bodies. So? Does that make you more or less of a person?

That being said, if part of your BODY was "contaminated" in such a manner and you don't have a problem with that, why should it matter if your inanimate firearm was previously used by the same person/people whose atoms are now inside your body? The firearm itself is just metal and wood (OK, and some plastic in some cases), it isn't what caused the harm (if any) that some people are concerned about.

Another way of thinking about it is that maybe your ownership of that firearm will result in a good use of it (i.e. take out a would-be murderer, or to teach a kid how to shoot well so that he can survive a war in 15 or 20 years, raise a family, defeat our enemies, etc.).

I own several milsurps (rifles only), and I'd be surprised if none of them was used to at least shoot at another person, if not kill an enemy combatant. I do plan on buying more.

However (here's the other side of the fence), being Jewish I simply can't bring myself to buy any German weapon that could have been used in WW2/the Holocaust. I just can't, despite everything I said above - with the exception of an Israeli Mauser, which was "redeemed" (in my somewhat altered mind) by being used to preserve Jewish lives before/during/after the 1948 Israeli War for Independence (and which I'm in the market for now).

As to a suicide gun - as someone else said, it'd be a bit creepy. But if it had a good enough price...maybe.

If you enjoyed reading about "Problem Owning a Firearm with a “Body” on it?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!