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

[.cheese.]

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]

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]

It's just a gun and there ain't no such thing as ghosts. Wouldn't bother me a bit.

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. I know, it may sound crazy, but we all have our hangups!

 

[Joe Demko]

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]

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]

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]

I would not have a problem. It's a piece of metal. It doesn't have a mind of it's own.

 

[thexrayboy]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Would you live in a dorm that was once a sanitarium for TB sufferers? Some friends of mine do.

 

[SVT93]

I might have a problem with a weapon used in a suicide. Depends on who it was though.

 

[jeepmor]

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]

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]

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~!

 

[.cheese.]

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.