Phoenix has last gun buy back

Well, that may not be true, although I hope it will be, in view of the current situation.

You see, in recent history, including in this last buy back, the guns that were purchased by the police department were destroyed.  In the future, thanks to a law passed by the Republican dominated legislature and signed by governor Jan Brewer (also Republican), it will be illegal in Arizona for police departments to destroy weapons.  Instead they will have to sell the guns to private, licensed, gun dealers.  Can’t even keep them.

Essentially returning the guns to the street, and most likely putting them into hands that will more likely use them than anyone who would have willingly turned them into the police for much less than they’d have gotten on the open market.

From the point of view of the NRA and its supporters, this creates yet another cash cow for the gun industry.

I’ve said it before:  the only way to get this problem solved is to replace the second amendment with one that does what the original second amendment was intended to do-make the people safe from a central government.   In view of the advances in weaponry, the regulation of possession that has been permitted (and rightly so), and the result of the Civil war, it looks to me as if the only way to do that is to replace the second amendment with one that allows states to secede.

With stupidity such as Arizona showed here, I might even want to make secession sometimes mandatory.  We ought not to have to tolerate such idiocy within our nation, but the only way to stop doing so is to make them form their own nation.  After all, if it came to having to fight them, it would be a struggle between powers who bore arms so much more powerful than these p-shooters that their right to bear arms capable of killing one another by the score wouldn’t figure into the struggle at all.  Just like it wouldn’t figure into the struggle if they tried to secede under the current constitution.

My earliest memories are from Arizona.  Incredibly beautiful desert terrain.  But, Goldwater notwithstanding, I had no idea how stupid Arizonans are.  I think there should be both a provision in the  constitution via which states could be evicted by the rest of the country and one in which, if states feel that strongly about it, they could quit.  We’d definitely have to attach prohibitions that make either decision carry consequences so that neither would come too easily.  But, Christ, why do I have to affiliate with such nut-

Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Phoenix has last gun buy back

  1. Fred Drake says:

    Until such time as the production and sale of new guns is outlawed I fail to see how this program does anything other than reduce the cost of the buy back program. Please explain how this is a cash cow for the gun industry. Wouldn’t they rather have customers purchase new guns? Or for that matter aren’t there enough used guns legally on the market to meet demand? There are many reasons to debate gun control but this doesn’t seem to me to be one of them or make people in Arizona nut cases.

    • George says:

      It will, without doubt, reduce the cost of the buy-back program-hopefully to zero, since the new model is the diametrical opposite of the old.

      The only reason anyone presently participates in a buy-back program is to have the gun destroyed, unless the gun is already below the value of even the governmentally sponsored buy-back price.  In that case the tax payer gets to subsidize the gun trade by becoming the market of last resort, guaranteeing a floor on the value of even inoperative guns. This is a downside of either the new or the old concept of a buy-back.

      In the new system, however, those guns which are reparable will be bought for almost nothing by a licensed dealer, repaired, and returned to the streets at great profit.  Under the old system, the gun was destroyed.

      Under the new scheme such a gun will obviously be another lethal addition to the problem gun buy-backs were intended to relieve.  Those that are not repairable would become a cost to the government for storage, I guess, as they can’t destroy them.

      For those who would normally participate in good faith as a seller to a police sponsored buy-back there is virtually no incentive for participating in the new form of buy-back, as selling it independently would reap a larger profit.

      They would do better, as a means of fully achieving their goal, to pay someone to melt the weapon down.

      More likely, they’ll just fight any urge to disarm the American war zone one gun at a time and risk a mistaken death by firearm or an impetuous suicide.

      Keeping a gun around does have the advantage of making a suicide effort much more likely to be successful, although the survivors are very apt to dispute the benefit of such an “advantage.”

      Of course, if someone who would normally be tempted to take advantage of a buy-back program does go to a licensed gun seller, the price they would ask, being motivated by a desire to see the gun gone, will be a pressure downward on the wholesale price, lowering the expense to a dealer of purchase and increasing the profit, but it would be counter to the intended purpose/goal of most such sellers.

      The bottom line of the gun market in America is that what drives it, in virtually every way, is the proliferation of guns.  The only motivation for most people to own a gun is the fact that almost anyone who might be inclined, even incidentally, to hurt you is very apt to have a gun with which to do it.

      Keeping guns in circulation, as opposed to seeing them destroyed for any reason, guarantees the continuation of the market.  More than any other factor, continuation of the market is the cash cow.

      The purchasers of new guns are, however, in a completely different market from the people who would be influenced by this new form of buy-back plan.

      Standard buy-backs only remove used guns from the market.  In most cases they are dormant quantities anyway, as they’re not going to be resold until the owner dies, which, of course, is more likely to happen to him/her with possession of the gun than without.

      But, in the case of a standard buy-back, the effect is to keep the price of used guns higher, since the temporary dormancy is rendered permanent and such a gun never competes with other weapons at all.  That may be why they’ve been tolerated for as long as they have been.  This pressure, however, is slight.

      Under the new version of buy-back, should it ever gain purchase, the gun sellers would have a supply of dead cheap weapons to sell to those whose only barriers to owning are price and an unwillingness to burgle houses.  I suppose one could argue that the new buy-back model fights crime by making the price of used guns lower and, therefore, the temptation to break in less appealing. One can,of course, argue the other side by pointing out the fact that more evil doers would be armed.

      But the new version will never take hold anyway.  It is designed for one thing only: to keep guns on he market forever by making it very difficult to remove them.

      In my opinion, anyone who wants to continue the proliferation of guns in this country is a nut case.  It’s absolutely one of the worst aspects of being American, and is matched only in war zones.

      I think there is virtually, if not literally, no validity to the one pro-“everybody has a right to carry a gun” argument that has any validity at all: namely the prevention of tyranny.   Unfortunately the advances in weaponry and the already accepted restrictions on what the citizens are allowed to possess and carry (due mainly to the rise of gangsters under prohibition) have rendered this original intent moot.

      As for sport, there is nothing in allowing government regulation that threatens the sportsman at all. No hunter needs a clip bigger than five shots, nor has a special need for a concealable weapon on the subway, in church, or in a school, nor needs to own hollow point or armor piercing ammunition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *