Would you buy firearm responsible for a death?


Squatting Bear
May 14, 2011, 08:19 PM
When shopping for a used firearm, would you be deterred from purchasing if you knew the weapon had fired a bullet/slug/shot that killed someone? I know it is really not the gun that is responsible, but the user. I don't buy into superstition, but personally, still wouldn't want one. On the other hand, I'm sure there are individuals who would like to buy a weapon with that type of history. Just curious. What are your opinions?

If you enjoyed reading about "Would you buy firearm responsible for a death?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
May 14, 2011, 08:20 PM
I wouldn't turn my back on it.

May 14, 2011, 08:21 PM
If I didn't I would have to throw away several of my Milsurps.

Cal-gun Fan
May 14, 2011, 08:22 PM
Honestly, I don't see how that changes anything about it for anyone. Something like a knife I could understand, because that actually physically had that person's blood on it. But a gun? People buy surplus rifles all the time-many of them, especially WWII rifles, probably killed somebody at some point in time at the very least.
People are entitled to have their superstitions. And I am entitled to think their superstitions are...to put it nicely, misplaced. :)

May 14, 2011, 08:24 PM
Makes no difference one way or the other for me.

May 14, 2011, 08:24 PM
Superstition? Wouldn't it be good luck? The previous owner used it and saved their life. If I owned a firearm that saved my life I wouldn't get rid of it!

May 14, 2011, 08:26 PM
Have you ever bought a used SKS or any surplus Military rifle chances you bought a killer gun............just saying

Jeff F
May 14, 2011, 08:26 PM
I have a Spanish Ruby .32 ACP that shot a armed store robber in the a$$ three times. So yea it would not bother me.

May 14, 2011, 08:28 PM
We've had this discussion several times before and the predominant response amounts to "Yes, it is just an object" or "What do you think all those milsurps are?".

Squatting Bear
May 14, 2011, 08:29 PM
Good point Smalls and Jeff. I suppose a suicide or murder might be different, but I don't think those firearms would be in circulation.

Squatting Bear
May 14, 2011, 08:30 PM
True about the surplus. *Tried* to search for a similar topic. My apologies for any duplication.

May 14, 2011, 08:31 PM
I suppose a suicide or murder might be different, but I don't think those firearms would be in circulation.

They are.

The shotgun used by a friend of mine to commit suicide was offered to me by his mother. Pistols used in crimes, including murder, are sometimes part of evidence property sales by LE departments and these are bought by winning FFL bidders who then put them out.

Don't worry about the duplication too much since it has been a while since the question was asked.

May 14, 2011, 08:38 PM
Don't care.

I may own a gun that has fired a shot that killed a person.

I may own a car that was used to run someone over.

Someone could have died in my house before I owned it.

Why would any of that matter to me? The house is perfectly liveable, the cars are driveable, and the guns are shootable. I really don't give a hoot about potentially morbid history of an inanimate object.

May 14, 2011, 08:39 PM
I suppose that owning Milsurps puts me into the "doesn't matter" camp, but actually; I'd rather not know the history behind a firearm other than that it is legitimate and not "hot" :fire:. I think that is a much more critical part of a guns history.

May 14, 2011, 08:39 PM
I have a lot of guns I bought used. A few are milsurps. I have no idea whether any had fired kill shots, but it is probable they did. yet I bought them anyway.

May 14, 2011, 08:40 PM
Personally, unless it was a type of gun I was already looking for, or interested in, no. But that goes for ANY gun I'm not looking for or interested in. Whether a gun has killed someone has no bearing on my choice to buy it, and owning several mil-surps, that's quite a good thing I figure.

May 14, 2011, 08:41 PM
I bought a bull that killed its owner.

Ky Larry
May 14, 2011, 08:47 PM
My great uncle had an old S&W Triple Lock .44Spl that was used to kill a revenue agent in, IIRC, 1932. I'd love to have that gun.

Ohio Gun Guy
May 14, 2011, 08:47 PM
I would definately avoid it if I knew it at purchase....

Surplus / historical firearms are different imo.

May 14, 2011, 08:54 PM
I suppose it's along the lines of the realtor thinking they can't sell the "murder house" (ie - Marge Simpson).

Some people will be superstitious about it, some saying it's a bit of history, and others "so?"

May 14, 2011, 08:55 PM
I made a thread some time ago asking the same as the OP but in a broader sense, too lazy to search it out.

It seemed that thread came to concensus that buying a firearm responsible for murder/suicide/defense/genocide or anything else just comes down to the individual. The question of buying a gun is no different at it's core than the question of buying a house someone died in.

In fact I went in to that thread opinionated that I would shy away from guns with a history of blood and walked away from it opinionated that as long as the stains had been cleaned, it had been sanitized, and was legally free and clear I'd take one up for sure.

May 14, 2011, 08:56 PM
Hello friends and neighbors // Sure, why not give the gun an honorable home.

I picked up two .380s, a Bersa and Tangifolo(sp??) ,a few months back from the local PD for $150, no mags but still worth it to me. Cleaned um up and traded them to a local GS for something I really wanted.

Never even thought to ask what crimes the guns were asssociated with.
The crimes were commited by a person not the gun.

May 14, 2011, 09:38 PM
I have a bunch of Eastern European milsurps. Two Finnish Mosins, a Yugo Tokarev, a Bulgarian Makarov, a couple of CZ-82s, a Nagant revolver... Who knows what was done with those? I really don't think about it much.

I think if the gun had been responsible for the death of someone I knew, I might feel differently. I don't know.

The question of buying a gun is no different at it's core than the question of buying a house someone died in.

I grew up in a house that the builder had committed suicide in before my family bought it. We knew about it, but hadn't known the man personally and never really gave it much thought. Tragic things happen all over the place all the time. It's something to maybe reflect on from time to time, but I wouldn't let something like that affect the way I live my life.

Anybody ever shop at the Salvation Army? You know that you're often buying dead people's clothes, right?

May 14, 2011, 09:40 PM
Logical perspective: Guns don't kill people. Bad people kill people.
Emotional perspective: It was involved in a death.

I guess I have mixed thoughts on the issue.

May 14, 2011, 09:42 PM
The gun wasn't responsible. Absent of human control, it would not have killed anyone.


May 14, 2011, 09:43 PM
my brother's girlfriend's roommate has a used dog that killed it's first owner.

the dog tripped an old lady while she was in the bathroom and the fall killed her.

May 14, 2011, 09:45 PM
Archigos - your comment brought to mind a bumper sticker I saw the other day:

"Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people."

And to go along with the theme of the thread, I wouldn't have a problem with purchasing a gun used for it's intended purpose.

May 14, 2011, 10:05 PM
When shopping for a used firearm, would you be deterred from purchasing if you knew the weapon had fired a bullet/slug/shot that killed someone? ...

It would not bother me at all.

May 14, 2011, 10:07 PM
Gun's a tool, an inanimate object. Now if it suddenly sprouted arms and legs and ate someones face off, I'd pass...

May 14, 2011, 10:08 PM
no firearm can be responsible for a death, it is an inanimate object. The resonsibility lies with the user.

May 14, 2011, 10:40 PM
I wouldn't turn my back on it.


I don't actively seek out blood guns, but I don't turn them down either.


May 14, 2011, 10:44 PM
A firearm cannot be responsible for death...its just an inanimate "machine"... only its operator can be responsible for such acts.

So yes, I'd buy the gun...its not the guns fault, and guns need good homes too!

Owen Sparks
May 14, 2011, 11:17 PM
The title of this thread really bothers me even though the OP claims to know better:

"Would you buy firearm responsible for a death?

TOOLS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE, HUMANS ARE. Most of us know better but many who support gun control do not understand this concept. When you use language like the above statement you are playing right into their hands.

Instead you should ask:

Would you buy a firearm that had been used by a killer?

Sure I would just so long as the killer was no longer attached to it.

May 14, 2011, 11:25 PM
i agree about the mil surps...except the K31...those are probably clean:neener:

Kendal Black
May 14, 2011, 11:43 PM
Cultural notions (http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHNV_enUS400US400&aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=deodand#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHNV_enUS400US400&source=hp&q=deodand+weapon&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=fcbb0051646d98a3) last a long time.

The idea of a deodand originated as a fine or tax, as well as a matter of practical law enforcement, but seems to have grown a five o'clock shadow of superstition.

I wouldn't want a gun that a friend used to kill himself, because I would think of the friend, and wonder what went wrong, but if a late friend used a gun lawfully and justly, and shot somebody or somebodies who rated it, I think I would honor that instead.

Remember, chilluns: "Crossbows don't kill people, quarrels kill people." :neener:

Friendly, Don't Fire!
May 14, 2011, 11:45 PM
Yes, I would have no problem accepting the fact that the gun was used at one point to kill someone.

I have a WWII 7.7 Jap that may have killed soldiers, it is not something I think about nor dwell on.

Would you purchase a car that someone died in?
How about a house?

May 14, 2011, 11:47 PM
When I hold a rifle that has drawn blood in battle, I can almost feel the history. I think a murder/suicide might be different.

May 14, 2011, 11:48 PM
a gun is a gun. I would not care if it had killed Gandhi, it is a gun and if I like it its mine

Ala Dan
May 14, 2011, 11:58 PM
I would luv to have the weapon used to kill Bin Laden~! :cool: ;)

May 15, 2011, 12:00 AM
So, what would you do if you had a bunch of wild cowboys rampaging through your town and they decided to crash your front door and murder everyone inside, and you used your most prized firearm to defend your family? What would you do with that gun? Get rid of it? Keep it? Frame it and put it on the wall?

Personally, I'd probably thank the gun and feed it a nice meal of light gun oil. :D

Kendal Black
May 15, 2011, 12:07 AM
The Israelis bought up tons of Nazi Mausers and used them for years.

May 15, 2011, 12:35 AM
Gun's a tool, an inanimate object. Now if it suddenly sprouted arms and legs and ate someones face off, I'd pass...

yessir I'd say that would be one gun I'd avoid too...probably avoid a few other things as well...like alcohol, prednisone, and hallucinogenics!

May 15, 2011, 12:50 AM
I bought a Subaru once that had run over and killed a bicyclist. Does that count?

The dealer did a poor job of repairing it and I had to fix and repaint some rust damage a few years later, but it never caused a problem after that. (Rustoleum red primer is great stuff, but I had to put gray primer over it to get the paint to stick)

May 15, 2011, 12:57 AM
I'd have no issue with it.

Cal-gun Fan
May 15, 2011, 01:03 AM
I bought a bull that killed its owner.
Now why in the hell would you do THAT? I don't mean to offend, but thats just darwinism right there :P

May 15, 2011, 01:14 AM
Doesn't bother me a bit.

May 15, 2011, 01:26 AM

yessir I'd say that would be one gun I'd avoid too...probably avoid a few other things as well...like alcohol, prednisone, and hallucinogenics!
Really? I mean, I'd pass too if it was a Decepticon, but if it was an Autobot, I'd have no problem buying it!

Would I care? Probably not. But if someone was like, "hey, I have this nice {insert some awesome firearm here} that was used to brutally murder 3 kids, the family dog, and that sweet old lady that used to live down the street, I'll give you a pretty good deal on for it if you want it," well, I might just pass on that.

May 15, 2011, 01:27 AM
"...guns with a history of blood..." No such thing.
It wouldn't ever be an issue, up here. Firearms used in crimes get chopped. Likely do in most other places too.

May 15, 2011, 02:15 AM
If it was ised by a friend in suicide no. I have several guns that were used in self defense and mil surps, never thoight twice about it. Although i might shy away from one used in an actual murder, i don't think it would feel right.

May 15, 2011, 03:15 AM
I've been pondering this a little, especially since someone mentioned a knife used in someones death. I think it depends on the connection between the object, and the persons death... And also how much of that person might be left behind.

Would you purchase a "perfectly good" bed someone had died in? Peacefully? How about violently? (I promise, it's clean!)

How about a corvette, a'la Mythbusters, that someone had decomposed in? Or how about a car that had run someone over? I know someone who still drives the car that they accidentally backed over a toddler in ... I don't know if I could do that. No one was at fault, it was a (very!) tragic accident but..

Would you be more, or less, likely to purchase a firearm if someone had been manually killed with it? (Say, a bayonette, or pistol whipped to death?) vs shot?

Many of these are cause for reflection - or absolute refusal to own the item... but it does make you think. For some reason, I think a rope that someone used to hang themselves (or someone else used to hang them) would be bad luck.

May 15, 2011, 03:18 AM
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

May 15, 2011, 04:02 AM
Wouldnt bother me. Not an issue.

f350 ff
May 15, 2011, 04:18 AM
It wouldn't bother me, it's just a tool that did it's job. The firearm wasn't responsible, the hand holding it and the brian controlling that hand are responsible. To me that question is like asking if I would buy a hammer that has struck a nail.

matt z

May 15, 2011, 03:02 PM
^what about a hammer that bends nails?

May 15, 2011, 03:12 PM
By the reading of the title of this thread...the firearm clearly should be incarcerated.

(Sorry, I read no further)

Rail Driver
May 15, 2011, 03:15 PM
It's a non-issue for me. Whether a given gun has fired a bullet that killed a person (or animal) or not has nothing to do with me. If the gun is legal for me to own and isn't stolen, I'd buy it even if it had been used "as intended".

May 15, 2011, 08:03 PM
I wouldn't really be troubled by it but I might be put off if it had a particularly gruesome story behind it (not that you would ever know if buying a used gun). But if it was used in a suicide by someone I knew (like someone had mentioned before) I would not want it whatsoever. With mil surps I'd hope they had killed someone, I like to imagine it was owned by some hero soldier, hope that isn't too dark.

Black Butte
May 15, 2011, 08:32 PM
Would you buy firearm responsible for a death?

When the firearm was released from prison and properly rehabilitated, I would consider buying it.

Owen Sparks
May 15, 2011, 08:48 PM
I have a key board that misspells lots of words.

May 15, 2011, 08:56 PM
The problem is "responsible" in the question!


Black Butte
May 15, 2011, 09:14 PM
Many firearm enthusiasts and forum members own military surplus rifles which have seen action.

May 15, 2011, 09:36 PM
I would have no issue whatsoever owning a firearm used to take the life of another. With military firearms used in combat it would only add to their provenance. Here is a great skit by Richard Pryor on the subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sunsLde_ZWY

May 15, 2011, 09:40 PM
if it is in good condition and the price was right..............sold:cool:

Owen Sparks
May 15, 2011, 10:18 PM
Recognize the last voice in the skit (the P-38)?

General Geoff
May 15, 2011, 10:19 PM
No different than buying a hammer that was used to build a house, really.

Mr White
May 15, 2011, 10:22 PM
If it was something I wanted, was in decent condition and was priced right, I wouldn't care of it killed a family of nuns. It isn't like the gun did anything wrong. It is just pieces of metal and maybe plastic. It has not evil will of its own.

May 15, 2011, 10:27 PM
I have the gun that my best friend killed himself with. My wife and I both shoot it and it holds special value in our hearts. My friend loved that gun, and we loved him.

May 15, 2011, 10:30 PM
If I owned a firearm that saved my life I wouldn't get rid of it!

Unless it was no longer functional, then "maybe".

May 15, 2011, 10:31 PM
I wouldn't knowingly have a firearm that was used in a crime that hadn't been cleared - I mean, I wouldn't want to take a chance on being implicated myself years down the line. But that's just prudence.

But otherwise, no problem; I'm not that superstitious, and don't believe ghosts attach themselves to objects. ;)

(I've got a WWII Jap rifle I inherited from my Dad, and a Samurai sword that's hundreds of years old - odds are, both have taken lives And I don't feel the least bit haunted.)

May 15, 2011, 10:39 PM
^ if it saved my life but was no longer functional it would be framed. If it was still functional it would still be on my hip everyday. Some people carry lucky rabbit's feet, I carry a gun.

May 15, 2011, 11:01 PM
lnjowell, I'm sorry about your friend. I think it's nice that the piece brings good memories of him to you.

May 16, 2011, 01:43 AM
lnjowell, I'm sorry about your friend. I think it's nice that the piece brings good memories of him to you.

Thank you for your condolences. Its been a few years now, but that kind of pain never goes away. It dulls, slips into the background, but sometimes a simple thing can trigger it and bring it back again.

Contrary to what a lot of people would think, the gun itself does not bring me bad feelings. In fact, I can remember us going together to the local gun shops and browsing and negotiating until we got the best deal we could get on it. I think about all the time we spent together working loads for it and our other guns. It brings a smile to my face and brings me a little closer to my lost friend when I shoot that gun. I could lose all of my other guns, including my first shotgun that my dad gave me when I was 11, but I would never let go of my friends pistol. A lot of us will never say it to our guy friends, most of us will never think about it, but once he was gone i realized what a huge part of my life he was, I loved him like a brother. We had been friends since we were 14 years old, and in most respects he was a member of our family.

Sorry to bore you with that story, but its important to the history of the firearm. Many people have expressed feelings that they would never want to own a gun that took a friend or relatives life. Its all in your perspective really, because the gun doesnt know what it was used to do, nor does it care.

May 16, 2011, 02:25 AM
Doesn't bother me. I think one of the former owners of my house died in my home (non-violently), just based on what the neighbors have told me. Doesn't bother me, either.

Death is inevitable for all of us, eventually. Even in a homicide the gun doesn't carry the burden of that death.

evan price
May 16, 2011, 03:28 AM
How would a firearm or any object be responsible for a death? It has no control or mind or consciousness. It is an object.

Heck, I found out from the neighbors that three people died in my house over the years gone by, including a small child who was accidentally run over by his father... Should I bulldoze it?

May 16, 2011, 08:06 AM
In my area (south Florida) any weapon used in a crime (or in a suicide) will never see the light of day again once a department impounded it. We were even very, very careful about selling/disposing of surplus department inventory weapons (only through a large dealer). As a practical matter a weapon has a lifespan that will greatly exceed its first owner, and if properly cared for will work just fine 100 years later. Many chiefs of police are quite careful of disposing weapons since any reporter can trace one back to its source if they're willing to take the time and effort. With all the other things that can shorten the tenure of a chief, being anything other than very careful about weapons that the Department controls isn't the best idea. I'm sure many small departments do things differently but in urban areas that's pretty much been my experience....

May 16, 2011, 08:14 AM
Would you buy firearm responsible for a death?

do you own a mosin or mauser?

royal barnes
May 16, 2011, 07:13 PM
One of our rookie officers committed suicide with his service revolver, a 4" Smith '66. It was eventually returned to the armory. I was being promoted from detective to sergeant and had to turn in my 2 1/2" Smith 66 for a full size duty weapon. The armory officer advised me he only had one in inventory and explained the circumstances asking how I felt about taking that one. I carried the gun until we transitioned to semiautos. I purchased it for $150 and it is now my nightstand gun. No, it wasn't a problem. The gun did nothing wrong.

May 16, 2011, 11:17 PM
Our town's 'not-so-bright' recovered from the Sheriff the revolver his father used to kill himself.

He then walked around town showing it off saying, "It's virtually brand new; it's only been fired once."


Deus Machina
May 17, 2011, 12:55 AM
It depends on the side it was on, but I wouldn't turn away only for that reason.

If I was shopping for Lugers, and had a choice between a never-unholstered bring-back or one fired twice into a Brit and captured after the war, I would just personally buy the one that had never been out of the holster.

On the other side, I have a very early, issued M44 rifle that I feel just fine about.

I also have a '42 Carcano--an Italian WW2 rifle. No importer's mark, so I'm pretty sure it's a bringback. I think that one might pull even.

I, personally, wouldn't feel good about owning a gun that was used to kill someone I know. Not so much distrusting the gun, but it would be the same as owning the motorcycle they fell off of. Something to fix, respect, and remember, but I wouldn't want that particular object as a reminder.

May 17, 2011, 01:47 AM
It wouldn’t bother me. In fact it has always disappointed me that I couldn’t get my grandfathers S&W 38 when he pasted (I was only 10 at the time.) My uncle took it and no-one ever saw or heard about it again. My grandfather was a Chicago Cop during prohibition, so who knows.

May 17, 2011, 03:37 PM
In fact, depending on who fired the shot and recieved the bullet, I might pay more. What if you could buy the gun that was used on Bin Laden, for example (I know it won' happen, but as an example...).


451 Detonics
May 17, 2011, 06:39 PM
One of my carry guns was used by a man to commit suicide, doesn't bother me in the least.

May 17, 2011, 07:56 PM
It would'nt bother me either. I had a friend of mine who bought a 9mm Luger for a $100 because the man just wanted to get rid of the gun even though it was handed down from his father; his son committed sideways with pistol and he coud'nt stand to look at it anymore. It is a very nice authentic piece even though it has that terrible history. Come to think of it I would probably have to get rid of it too if I was wearing his shoes.

May 18, 2011, 01:06 AM
I'm sure I own a couple milsurps that were used in war, impossible to know if they were responsible for a death or not.

Guns used in suicide I'd probably pass on. Anything else is fair game unless I know it's a murder weapon in which case I wouldn't want to implicate myself by being in possession of it.

May 18, 2011, 01:38 AM
How, may I ask, is a 'firearm responsible for a death'????

Cop Bob
May 19, 2011, 03:54 PM
With me, it is more of circumstance thing.
I have an 1871 New Army that was carried by a relative that was an E-Texas Lawman in the day.. It is supposed to have been used to kill several men... It is a cherished family Heirloom...

I have another pistol that was used to same my life.... It has an honored place in my collection..

There was another opportunity to obtain a pistol that a co-worker went sideways with... the two Homicide detectives that worked the case were friends of mine.. when the investigation was finished they contacted the family and offered the pistol to back to them, they told them to release it to me, that deceased would probably want me to have it... I got a call from one of the detectives, he asked me to meet him for lunch.. When we met, he had the pistol and wanted to give it to me... I declined, and told him no, he could keep it... he now has it, he was tickled to get it, but he didn't know the guy... To me, it would just be a bad memory.. one that I don't need..

May 19, 2011, 04:14 PM
depends on who it did in.

May 19, 2011, 04:49 PM
Nope, any gun capable of killing on it's own needs to be put down immediately.

May 19, 2011, 05:06 PM
Well, at least you'd know it functions as designed and doesn't have pacifistic tendencies in a moment of need.

Seriously though, would you question whether the lead in the wheel weights on your car was previously recovered from someone's body? Or the copper wiring/pipes in your house? Or if the paper clips on your desk were previously part of a saturday night special that was chopped up after the trial?

Doesn't really matter to me. Between my M1, SKS, Gew98 and Springfield 1898 there's a good chance one of them fired a kill shot. I just wouldn't dwell on it.

May 19, 2011, 07:11 PM
I wouldn't want a gun that a personal friend or family member used to commit suicide (unfortunately there are several), but other than that, No. I wouldn't have a problem.

May 19, 2011, 10:19 PM
Would make zero difference to me. I also own milsurps that surely were a tool of death.

I would buy a car, house, or heck even take a heart transplant that came from a death...

May 19, 2011, 10:39 PM
When shopping for a used firearm, would you be deterred from purchasing if you knew the weapon had fired a bullet/slug/shot that killed someone?

Nope, it's just a tool. It's my preference to have one that wasn't used in violence, but I wouldn't let it stop me from getting a good deal on a gun. When buying used, do you really even know for sure whether or not it was used to shoot someone?

May 19, 2011, 11:22 PM
Yes absolutlly, that would indicate to me that the gun was in fine working condition

May 19, 2011, 11:56 PM
I own a Carcano, and a 1903, one I am pretty certain has taken one or more lives, the other is at least likely to have. I look at it like this

| don't get mad when someone tells me how hot my wife is, I consider it a compliment that my wife is a looker. (I would rather have one people want to look at than one no one wants to.) Having a gun that was used to take a life is a similar thing, would rather have one that worked well enough to be used than one that was a junker and not worthy.

May 20, 2011, 12:25 AM
Ernest Hemingway killed himself with his favorite shotgun. That's a gun I'd love to have, despite its morbid past. Actually, I'd love to have any of Hemingway's guns, but that shotgun would be the center of any conversation.

Otherwise, I wouldn't care if I purchased a firearm used against another person.

May 20, 2011, 01:27 AM
the firearm didn't kill, the bullet did

If you enjoyed reading about "Would you buy firearm responsible for a death?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!