Police Officers in 11 States have to sell back firearms confiscated in raids

[Stormwarden]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/21/news/police-selling-seized-guns/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_deskrecommended_pool&iid=obnetwork

Now, I know you guys view me as one the pro-gun sorts, but there are rules, damn it. And you don't sell back firearms seized in raids. And if you HAVE to do so, get plenty of background checks, make sure it isn't a straw purchase, and on top of it, make sure the gun wasn't used in any prior crimes.

[The_Queen]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/21/news/police-selling-seized-guns/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_deskrecommended_pool&iid=obnetwork

Now, I know you guys view me as one the pro-gun sorts, but there are rules, damn it. And you don't sell back firearms seized in raids. And if you HAVE to do so, get plenty of background checks, make sure it isn't a straw purchase, and on top of it, make sure the gun wasn't used in any prior crimes.

We've had this discussion a lot of times: due to the NRA tying the hands of the ATF, monitoring straw purchasers is a waste of time and resources. There was a fiasco a few years ago. It was fast. It was furious. It was like a scandal. It was a scandal. It was the fast and furious scandal; it involved guns and known straw purchases, but even with all the evidence the DoJ had, they still couldn't do anything due to the laws' bizarre evidentiary requirements. I would be surprised if the other proposals you mentioned are not similarly estopped by federal or state laws pushed by the NRA.

Behind this trend are powerful special interests like the National Rifle Association (NRA), which argues that the fear of these guns getting into the hands of criminals is "absurd" and part of an anti-gun agenda. It says that by destroying guns, police departments are not only eliminating perfectly functional weapons, but also throwing away a potential source of revenue.

Why am I not surprised. Will somebody please think of the gerns?

[nickiknack]

Being pro-gun isn't a bad thing, especially when you have you're head screwed on straight and don't come off as a lunatic, like all the pro-gun people on here.

[Askold]

Considering that the US police confiscate any guns in the house even if they have nothing to do with the crimes and sometimes don't even belong to criminals this ain't that bad. Besides, if the gun can be legally owned then getting it back to the streets isn't that bad since most of them go to law abiding citizens anyway.

[Ironchew]

Being pro-gun isn't a bad thing, especially when you have you're head screwed on straight and don't come off as a lunatic, like all the pro-gun people on here.

You do realize that, not only are mentally ill people more likely to be the victim of violence rather than the perpetrator, but most shooters are not mentally ill?

Funny thing about the gun fondler culture is that we can never tell which ones are the violent ones until they start shooting people; meanwhile they're up to their eyeballs in guns waiting for the chance...

[The_Queen]

Being pro-gun isn't a bad thing, especially when you have you're head screwed on straight and don't come off as a lunatic, like all the pro-gun people on here.

You do realize that, not only are mentally ill people more likely to be the victim of violence rather than the perpetrator, but most shooters are not mentally ill?

Funny thing about the gun fondler culture is that we can never tell which ones are the violent ones until they start shooting people; meanwhile they're up to their eyeballs in guns waiting for the chance...

I would agree, but I would qualify your statement as "most mass shooters are not diagnosed as mentally ill." Mass shootings being defined as requiring 3 fatalities by the FBI. Thing is, it is easy to play arm-chair psychologist and say "that man is crazy" after he shoots 9 people in a school and takes his own life. No one will say that there wasn't something wrong with him, and nobody can really understand what would motivate an act of senseless and random violence. The problem is that ad hoc labeling of mass shooters as crazy has no predictive value in terms of stopping the next mass shooter, so it fails Popperian demarcation, and serves only to distract us from the question of what policies may effectively stop a future mass shooter.

I could also be reading your statement wrong, and you could be saying "of all shootings in this country, relatively few  are done by people with mentally illness." If this is how you intended to convey your thought, then I would agree because we know that the mentally ill are less likely, in the aggregate to perpetrate gun violence. In fact, a number of studies--and especially those NOT funded by the NRA--indicate that easy access to guns* has more to do with gun violence than mental illness.

*Directed at Askold for saying that "getting [guns] back to the street isn't that bad since most of them go to law abiding citizens." (emphasis added)

[Ironchew]

In fact, a number of studies--and especially those NOT funded by the NRA--indicate that easy access to guns* has more to do with gun violence than mental illness.

On the topic of well-funded research, it's about time we stopped specifically banning the CDC from researching gun violence. The fact that such a move is effectively political suicide doesn't say anything good about the pro-gun crowd.

[The_Queen]

In fact, a number of studies--and especially those NOT funded by the NRA--indicate that easy access to guns* has more to do with gun violence than mental illness.

On the topic of well-funded research, it's about time we stopped specifically banning the CDC from researching gun violence. The fact that such a move is effectively political suicide doesn't say anything good about the pro-gun crowd.

That, and the fact that the NRA and gun manufacturers pushed hard in 2005 to restrict lawsuits against gun manufacturers for their negligent contributions to mass shootings. That fact tells me that there is a link between the number of guns in a society and its proclivity for violence, which  gun manufacturers know of, and yet are more than happy to profit from and contribute to. Even is a legal matter of administration, such a decision as whether or not to bar suits against gun manufacturers should be left to the courts and not enforced statutorily by the legislature.

TL;DR the NRA is shady as fuck.

[Askold]

I still say that criminals make up a minority of gun owners, even in USA.

But NRA is weird. They seem to have turned into a group that looks out for gun manufacturers rather than gun owners.

Gun politics in USA is weird in most ways.

California wants to restrict gun ownership but since they can't make any actually effective laws that only alter the appearance of guns -since gun companies circumvent most of the laws. The laws against pistol grips (which I think are silly) made them design weird looking guns that fulfill the laws to the letter while defying the intent of the laws- or simply make using guns harder like the locks for removing magazines.

What you really need are laws that make it harder for individual to get ANY firearms by requiring some sort of tests to weed out those who are mentally ill and a working gun registration.

Unfortunately your constitution prevents those things from happening and the people who think the 2nd amendment is the only thing stopping tyranny from happening will oppose any of the sensible laws.

[The_Queen]

I still say that criminals make up a minority of gun owners, even in USA.

Like a broken needle kid, you're missing the point. The issue is not which group is the majority, but whether easy access to guns for everyone thereby makes it easier for criminals and would-be-criminals to obtain guns so as to commit illegal acts.

[Askold]

I still say that criminals make up a minority of gun owners, even in USA.

Like a broken needle kid, you're missing the point. The issue is not which group is the majority, but whether easy access to guns for everyone thereby makes it easier for criminals and would-be-criminals to obtain guns so as to commit illegal acts.

Sorry, I was supposed to write some more but accidentally published an unfinished post.

[Damen]

To the best of my knowledge, police that resell seized guns do so to FFL holders, after checking to see if they were used in a crime, who then run background checks on perspective buyers so this really seems like a non-issue. I don't see a problem with this, especially after seeing historical firearms that should be in a museum end up in a buyback bin to be destroyed. Springfield 1903s, STG44s and Colt 1903s just to name some off the top of my head. If gun seizures end up netting historical firearms (and I have no doubt they do) then fuck yes I say sell them to an FFL or give them to a museum. And non-historical firearms I have no trouble with either because the gun seized from a methhead can be resold properly to a person needing protection from an abusive estranged partner. Will they fall into the wrong hands? They might, it's happened before. But they can, and do, also end up in the right hands far, far more often.

And after skimming the article, I think I can sum it up by saying: "GUNS! NRA! BE SCARED! BOOGY BOOGY!" Yes, I am jaded on fear-mongering articles like this one because I see it all the fucking time from "journalists" who know sweet fuck all about what they are talking about and want build up sensationalist bullshit out of a non-issue.

I am operating on sleep deprivation and my fuse is mighty short so this post might come off a little more heated than would otherwise be deserved.

*EDIT*

Interesting coincidence, this is my 1776th post.

[nickiknack]

Yeah, didn't mean for this to break out into what ever it's on it's way of becoming. It was meant to point out that all the pro gun people on here are level headed individuals, who are in favor of regulations and background checks, and aren't gun nutters who fondle their guns like we see all so often in American gun culture, which is insane compared to other gun cultures like we see in the high gun owning European countries. Didn't mean the literal interpretation, there are things called metaphors and I say this as someone with a mental illness.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Yeah, didn't mean for this to break out into what ever it's on it's way of becoming. It was meant to point out that all the pro gun people on here are level headed individuals, who are in favor of regulations and background checks, and aren't gun nutters who fondle their guns like we see all so often in American gun culture, which is insane compared to other gun cultures like we see in the high gun owning European countries. Didn't mean the literal interpretation, there are things called metaphors and I say this as someone with a mental illness.

It's okay.  Chewie was just being pedantic.

[lord gibbon]

Ugh, American gun laws are an unmitigated disaster. Why can't we have good gun laws, like Japan or France?