ca4106
Member
That's just my opinion, but I think my theory makes sense:
http://freedomedium.com/2009/06/gun-buyback-programs-actually-benefit-criminals/
http://freedomedium.com/2009/06/gun-buyback-programs-actually-benefit-criminals/
Gun Buyback Programs Actually Benefit Criminals
June 4, 2009 ·
To those of you who allow your ideology regarding gun control to overrule your common sense, the scenario I am about to present will seem a bit farfetched.
Those of you capable of rational thought will feel otherwise.
Allow us to consider a typical gun buyback program in an U.S. town or city:
The news media will make announcements that the local police department will be handing out gift cards to dining establishments, retail shops, whatever, for any firearm a citizen turns into the police, no questions asked.
Usually, the rationale behind these programs is explained as being a way of reducing the number of guns that could be stolen and used in a crime, and/or as a means of preventing accidental shooting deaths.
The question remains, do programs such as these really accomplish their purpose?
Let’s think about in in depth.
First, let’s tackle the reduction in accidental deaths claim.
I’ll allow that not having access to a firearm may reduce the possibilty of injury or death due to an accidental shooting.
However, if you were to deeply research statistics from the National Center For Disease Control, a U.S. government agency that tracks just about everything medical as related to life and death in the United States, you would find that accidental deaths due to the misuse of a firearm rank last as a cause.
On average, each year twenty times more accidental deaths occur in the U.S. as a result of someone falling off of something.
Seems to me like a stepladder buyback program would save more lives.
Now, as to the claim that such programs lessen the possibility of stolen guns being used in a crime, take a look at the following excerpt taken from the interview of an ATF agent appearing on the PBS series Frontline:
“Ask a cop on the beat how criminals get guns and you’re likely to hear this hard boiled response: “They steal them” But this street wisdom is wrong, according to one frustrated Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) agent who is tired of battling this popular misconception.
An expert on crime gun patterns, ATF agent Jay Wachtel says that most guns used in crimes are not stolen out of private gun owners’ homes and cars.
”Stolen guns account for only about 10% to 15% of guns used in crimes,” Wachtel said.
Because when they want guns they want them immediately the wait is usually too long for a weapon to be stolen and find its way to a criminal.”
So, you have an agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tabacco and Firearms disputing the popular left-wing claim that most guns used in the commisson of a crime were stolen from a private residence.
That still leaves a criminal many more, and possibly much easier ways to obtain a firearm.
I think the above is sufficent proof that gun buyback programs fail miserably as either a means of preventing accidental deaths or as a crime reduction method.
However, all of this still leaves my assertion that gun buyback programs are actually a boon to the criminal elements of society.
Well, for one thing, planning and running the programs, performing the actual buyback itself, the paperwork involved, and the disposal of the firearms surely takes up an inordinate amount of law enforcement time and resources.
Time and resources that would be put to better use investigating crimes and arresting criminals.
Another advantage to the criminal element is that the number of law abiding citizens owning firearms is reduced.
Thus reducing the number of people who would have an effective means of self-defense avialable in the event of a burgulary,robbery, or home invasion.
A multitude of interviews of prison inmates have shown the inmates making the statement that they are highly unlikely to attempt a criminal act against a homeowner they believe to be armed.
And before any of you gun control zealots who may be reading this try and tell me that these potential victims could simply call the police, what happens between the time you discover someone attempting to break into your home and the time the police arrive?
The average response time to a 911 call for police assistance is eight minutes.
That response time could prove to be the longest eight minutes of your life.
Providing you are still alive when all is said and done.
However, the average response time for a .357 Magnum is 1,235 feet per second.
Finally, I wonder if the people behind the idea of these gun buyback programs have ever considered the possibility that they may be creating a pool of potential victims.
Because if I were an individual of a criminal frame of mind, I, perhaps along with some fellow lawbreakers, would simply monitor the area where the program was taking place, and then follow home the people who turned in their firearms.
Now I know that not only don’t these folks have a firearm in the house that they may be able to use against me, I also know where these people unable to defend themselves live.
Not only am I now free to steal from them whatever I want, along with perhaps taking the time to commit murder while I am at it, or perhaps rape any female who happens to be at home, I can now treat myself to dinner afterwards with the gift card the police so kindly provided.
Because if I were an individual of a criminal frame of mind, I, perhaps along with some fellow lawbreakers, would simply monitor the area where the program was taking place, and then follow home the people who turned in their firearms.
Now I know that not only don’t these folks have a firearm in the house that they may be able to use against me, I also know where these people unable to defend themselves live.
Does that really happen? Not even a NCIC (or whatever system they use) check to see if it was stolen?rickomatic said:[W]hen "buy back" programs are held, the usual procedure is to accept some kind of gift card for turning in a firearm "NO QUESTIONS ASKED". Upon receipt of these weapons, they are summarily destroyed. Essentially what is happening in I'm sure not a small number of instances, is the easy disposal of a firearm used in a crime, and the evidence being destroyed by the very agency tasked with SOLVING crimes.
There is an even larger 900 pound gorilla in the room here.
When "buy back" programs are held, the usual procedure is to accept some kind of gift card for turning in a firearm "NO QUESTIONS ASKED". Upon receipt of these weapons, they are summarily destroyed. Essentially what is happening in I'm sure not a small number of instances, is the easy disposal of a firearm used in a crime, and the evidence being destroyed by the very agency tasked with SOLVING crimes.
If I were a criminal "trying to get rid of" a murder weapon, the very LAST place that I'd bring it is a buy-back program!!! I might get free dinner..................... for life!
a few of the people I saw turning in weapons were elderly females who possibly lost a husband and wanted to "get that gun out of the house".
+1. A gun buyback is the safest way for a criminal to dispose of the evidence of his crime.When "buy back" programs are held, the usual procedure is to accept some kind of gift card for turning in a firearm "NO QUESTIONS ASKED". Upon receipt of these weapons, they are summarily destroyed. Essentially what is happening in I'm sure not a small number of instances, is the easy disposal of a firearm used in a crime, and the evidence being destroyed by the very agency tasked with SOLVING crimes.
I can't imagine a criminal with a murder weapon wanting to go anywhere near a cop. I can't imagine a criminal wanting to go near a cop, period.
I can't imagine a criminal with a murder weapon wanting to go anywhere near a cop. I can't imagine a criminal wanting to go near a cop, period.
Well, for one thing, planning and running the programs, performing the actual buyback itself, the paperwork involved, and the disposal of the firearms surely takes up an inordinate amount of law enforcement time and resources.
Time and resources that would be put to better use investigating crimes and arresting criminals.
Another advantage to the criminal element is that the number of law abiding citizens owning firearms is reduced.
Thus reducing the number of people who would have an effective means of self-defense avialable in the event of a burgulary,robbery, or home invasion.
A multitude of interviews of prison inmates have shown the inmates making the statement that they are highly unlikely to attempt a criminal act against a homeowner they believe to be armed.
And before any of you gun control zealots who may be reading this try and tell me that these potential victims could simply call the police, what happens between the time you discover someone attempting to break into your home and the time the police arrive?
The average response time to a 911 call for police assistance is eight minutes.
That response time could prove to be the longest eight minutes of your life.
Providing you are still alive when all is said and done.
However, the average response time for a .357 Magnum is 1,235 feet per second.
Finally, I wonder if the people behind the idea of these gun buyback programs have ever considered the possibility that they may be creating a pool of potential victims.
Because if I were an individual of a criminal frame of mind, I, perhaps along with some fellow lawbreakers, would simply monitor the area where the program was taking place, and then follow home the people who turned in their firearms.
Now I know that not only don’t these folks have a firearm in the house that they may be able to use against me, I also know where these people unable to defend themselves live.
FROGO207 said:+1 to posts 17&18. IMHO MOST criminals are criminals because they are lazy and want the easy way out of surviving in this world. Yeah some are using violence as power but most are lazy and careless. How do you think most get caught.