Posted on 10/31/2011 5:15:22 AM PDT by marktwain
The city of Cleveland became a little safer last Thursday—safer for criminals.
In what has become an annual spectacle, the city dumped more than 700 firearms into the Number 1 Basic Oxygen Furnace at the Cleveland Arcelor Mittal facility.
The formerly useful weapons, collected in “gun buyback” programs in the city and surrounding communities in September, were subjected to temperatures of about 2,400 degrees Fahrenheit and 200 tons of molten iron.
Here’s a video of the actual event, but be warned, it’s difficult to watch.
It’s not clear how the city could “buy back” something it didn’t own in the first place.
According to WTAM 1100 news, “Parma Mayor Dean DePiero says in a small but significant way, the gun buy back program is making our streets safer, and hopes it is expanded to more communities next year.” Presumably he said this with a straight face. But he’s wrong—dead wrong.
At best, the destruction of the firearms will have no negative impact. It’s also possible, though, that the lack of a gun will ensure that an innocent victim does not have the means of self-protection in the face of an attack.
Sometimes well-meaning people, because they haven’t “needed” a gun in a number of years, figure they may as well get rid of it like they would any other clutter. Elderly people, in particular, are frequently encouraged to rid their homes of unneeded firearms.
But that could prove costly. In the same month Cleveland was hosting its “gun buyback” scheme, a 70-year old woman in Detroit used her firearm to thwart a home invasion by two men. Thankfully, this woman had not disposed of her self-defense weapon.
A better use of the “bought back” guns would have been to give them to poor people in high crime areas who can’t afford one of their own. “Oh, but these people would not be trained,” I can hear politicians protest.
Well, besides the fact that “training” is not a prerequisite for the exercising of a constitutional right, there would be plenty of qualified trainers willing to donate their time to such an effort.
Although not likely to be taken seriously by any big-city mayors toady, academic studies have shown that this would have a positive impact on violent crime rates.
This was most thoroughly proven by economist Dr. John Lott, who studied the crime data of every county in the country over a period of 18 years. Dr. Lott found that more firearms in the hands of the people actually led to lower crime rates. His study, published in the book More Guns, Less Crime, also found that crime reduction was pronounced in high-crime areas.
But instead of the guns being transformed in a useful way that actually could lower the crime rate, they were converted into washing machines, car parts and refrigerators.
Maybe Cleveland’s future victims will be encouraged to thwart an intruder by offering to make him a sandwich and wash his clothes.
The next time you are looking to find a firing pin for that great old J.C. Higgins shotgun that you inherited from your grandfather, remember that cities around the country joyously drive the price up so that they can engage in the modern equivilant of potlatch.
Inherited from my Grandfather hell: I bought that gun myself when I was 15 years old more than 60 years ago.
Unfortunately I lost it and all the rest of my guns in the big duck blind fire a year or so back. (wink)
These are stolen weapons or what? Seems again a cop to criminal and stolen goods traffic to me. Plus the tax payer will pay for the program, paying someone to buy their guns is fraud, so no cash benefit there but a buraucatic feel good gavy train again.
Ah, yeah, I seem to remember “Indians and gypsies” buying my stuff to make art with it for the “UN” program...
I don’t want cheap handguns available to the criminal populace of my city; as such, these gun “buyback” programs are one of the few gun control measures that I won’t raise hell about. I think most of us can agree that guns don’t belong in the hands of criminals therefore, gun control measures that only target criminal access to guns are preferable to blanket gun control measures that take away rights from law abiding citizens while doing nothing to restrict access by criminals.
criminals love “gun buy backs”
makes their jobs easier and safer.
While the stupid intelligent idiot politicians rejoice that thier program is a success the thugs are trading it in for bigger and better arms. Good job
The only guns criminals would be selling at these "buy-backs" would be the ones that don't work.
They are useless at decreasing the net criminal arsenal.
guns don’t belong in the hands of criminals
How many guns were turned in by criminals? I’ll bet none.
It would be useful if the author of the article pointed out:
1. Whether or not ballistics were done on these firearms to determine whether they were involved in a crime.
2. If serial numbers were run to determine whether the guns were stolen.
Also, it would be nice to see local gun clubs setting up a booth outside of these “buyback locations” offering to examine guns prior to turning them in and offering to purchase them at market prices.
Could have an FFL dealer there to make it legal.
Also, could be couched in terms of a “protest” against the buyback to make interference a free speech issue.
The guns being “bought back” are typically the kind of cheap firearms that end up being pointed at law abiding citizens by dirtbag criminals that can’t afford the higher end pieces. I’m not in favor of legislative gun control but I have no problem with buyback programs that remove cheap handguns from city streets. A buyback program may not make a lot of sense out in Ohio’s rural counties but in our cities, it does make sense. blanket gun control legislation that targets law abiding citizens instead of criminals never makes sense of course.
I’m pretty-sure criminals don’t buy their guns “retail”.
They either steal them themselves or buy them from thieves.
They were standing on the sidewalk outside a buy back event that was offering $50 per firearm.
Capitalists always looking for a way to build a better mousetrap.
yes, so by all means, let’s make sure that we keep as many cheap handguns floating around on the streets as possible so the felons won’t have any trouble getting their hands on one.
Are you actually taking the position that criminals sell functional firearms at “gun buybacks”?
Or are you saying that honest citizens should sell their guns so that criminals won’t steal them?
Feeble, AND having trouble grasping reality - oh my!
“You can’t fix stupid”
that would be you, definitely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.