It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"San Francisco And Oakland Crowds Hand Over Guns In Buyback"

page: 5
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Man, you mean an mp44, those are NFA, she's lucky BATF didn't see that.




posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad
Most of the guns criminals have come from homes of gun owers the rob. Then again what are the odds of perfectly inocent person being the victim of a home invasion? You have far betters odds of shooting yourself then you ever do a criminal. I have never had to draw a weapon at home but, I also practice gun safety and also secure my weapons. Something clearly most gun owners do not. They are the problem.


This is one of the problems.... I think if they push anything it should be that a person needs to show proof of a gun safe before they can buy a gun. We should have people required to register a safe and if they don't then they get fined 200 bucks a month or show proof they got rid of their guns.

If you want guns then show proof of securing them too. My safe is 800 pounds and mounted to the floor...good luck in getting that baby out of my house with an alarm system in place...hehe



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
Man, you mean an mp44, those are NFA, she's lucky BATF didn't see that.


Pre ban I guess, but been in her closet for like 40 years with no clue to what she had.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Watson was quoted as saying "a fully automatic assault pistol, shotguns, rifles, and a rifle with a bayonet attached to it"
the writer added the assault rifle bit
edit on 23-12-2012 by zonetripper2065 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


That's not even remotely similar. but ok I'll give it a crack
The internet is a vast network of computers and servers. Your computer connects to your ISP server which in turn is connected to its own set of servers that connect it to host severs that store the information that we seek through our computers. bazinga



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Spike Spiegle
 



Doesn't surprise me. California is the lunatic asylum of the United States. Chronically bankrupt from all their "good ideas" funded by the tax payer, who gets tired of their BS and leaves for another state.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spike Spiegle

"San Francisco And Oakland Crowds Hand Over Guns In Buyback"



www.breitbart.com

In San Francisco and Oakland on Saturday, citizens brought their guns to sell to the police in return for cash. Every volunteer who returned a gun was $200 richer walking away. The line was so long in San Francisco that there was no cash left after lunchtime and I.O.U.s were substituted instead.

Oakland’s police chief, Howard Jordan, said, "When we remove guns off our streets that could be used in a crime, we reduce the possibility of our youth and community being a victim.”

There’s only one problem with this scenario: in all likelihood, it’s the law-abiding citizens returning g
(visit the link for the full news article)
CBS
Mercury


Personally, I think these people who are turning in their guns for a measly $200 are idiots.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by AuranVector
 


LOL,

I have some old junk .22's and Mosins that I would gladly turn in for $200 so then I could go buy a good one



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by tjack
 


Do you have any combat training? Do you understand how easy it is to disarm someone? Ever been shot? Ever been stabbed? Which do you prefer I'd take a bullet over a stab wound any day, and to be honest in your own home a criminal is at a serious disadvantage. You are better off using something other than a gun, in a high stress situation where you could send a round through a wall and injure your family. In a CQC situation you want to neutralize your target as quickly as possible, and I don't know about you but people aren't necessarily easy to kill. You shoot the gun toting criminal and unless you've hit his hand, heart or head he is still 100% capable to empty his gun into you and your home. At which point you will likely do the same. Houses aren't meant to stop bullets, if you have children in your home think about that.

Do you have High stress shooting skills? Have you ever been shot at and had to return accurate fire? I'm willing to be my life the vast majority of American gun owners do not possess the necessary skills to accurately discharge their weapons in the dark under the stress that would come with an armed intruder. Standing in the dark and swinging a bat, a firing a taser at center of mass will put the most would be criminal on his ass guaranteed.

My logic, is not flawed. I have a family myself, I also own firearms. I however will not risk using a firearm inside my home for the exact fear a round could carry through the intruder into one of my loved ones rooms, or god forbid I get taken out giving them my firearms. I'm plenty happy to put my face on a poster professing I would not use my firearms on an intruder. It's too risky for the other occupants of my home.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by infolurker
reply to post by AuranVector
 


LOL,

I have some old junk .22's and Mosins that I would gladly turn in for $200 so then I could go buy a good one


Good point, infolurker. I didn't think of that.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hijinx
reply to post by tjack
 


Do you have any combat training? Do you understand how easy it is to disarm someone? Ever been shot? Ever been stabbed? Which do you prefer I'd take a bullet over a stab wound any day, and to be honest in your own home a criminal is at a serious disadvantage. You are better off using something other than a gun, in a high stress situation where you could send a round through a wall and injure your family. In a CQC situation you want to neutralize your target as quickly as possible, and I don't know about you but people aren't necessarily easy to kill. You shoot the gun toting criminal and unless you've hit his hand, heart or head he is still 100% capable to empty his gun into you and your home. At which point you will likely do the same. Houses aren't meant to stop bullets, if you have children in your home think about that.

Do you have High stress shooting skills? Have you ever been shot at and had to return accurate fire? I'm willing to be my life the vast majority of American gun owners do not possess the necessary skills to accurately discharge their weapons in the dark under the stress that would come with an armed intruder. Standing in the dark and swinging a bat, a firing a taser at center of mass will put the most would be criminal on his ass guaranteed.

My logic, is not flawed. I have a family myself, I also own firearms. I however will not risk using a firearm inside my home for the exact fear a round could carry through the intruder into one of my loved ones rooms, or god forbid I get taken out giving them my firearms. I'm plenty happy to put my face on a poster professing I would not use my firearms on an intruder. It's too risky for the other occupants of my home.


guaranteed, huh, ok.


no to the combat training, but yes to plenty of armed citizen training.


I still reserve the right to think that anyone STUPID enough to second guess a criminals intentions is a damn fool. mmmkay?

Good luck disarming the bad guy in your house, I sincerey hope you never have to.
To each his/her own.




edit on 23-12-2012 by tjack because: wow i seriously can't believe this guy....



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Spike Spiegle
 


Ya it's only the WW2 collection Americans did keep the new toys.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hijinx
reply to post by tjack
 


Do you have any combat training? Do you understand how easy it is to disarm someone? Ever been shot? Ever been stabbed? Which do you prefer I'd take a bullet over a stab wound any day, and to be honest in your own home a criminal is at a serious disadvantage. You are better off using something other than a gun, in a high stress situation where you could send a round through a wall and injure your family. In a CQC situation you want to neutralize your target as quickly as possible, and I don't know about you but people aren't necessarily easy to kill. You shoot the gun toting criminal and unless you've hit his hand, heart or head he is still 100% capable to empty his gun into you and your home. At which point you will likely do the same. Houses aren't meant to stop bullets, if you have children in your home think about that.

Do you have High stress shooting skills? Have you ever been shot at and had to return accurate fire? I'm willing to be my life the vast majority of American gun owners do not possess the necessary skills to accurately discharge their weapons in the dark under the stress that would come with an armed intruder. Standing in the dark and swinging a bat, a firing a taser at center of mass will put the most would be criminal on his ass guaranteed.

My logic, is not flawed. I have a family myself, I also own firearms. I however will not risk using a firearm inside my home for the exact fear a round could carry through the intruder into one of my loved ones rooms, or god forbid I get taken out giving them my firearms. I'm plenty happy to put my face on a poster professing I would not use my firearms on an intruder. It's too risky for the other occupants of my home.


Yes your logic is flawed there are appropriate firearms for the house the won't go through the criminal and kill your family or the guy down the street. And you should have your fields of fire already mapped out in the house. I have a hard time believing you are combat trained and don't understand the simple logic of using the right weapon for the job.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Could this be a precurser to marshal law? convince the citizens to hand ove there weapons freely, then no one has away to protect themselvs



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
This has been done before.
The reason they didnt do a follow up and the reason it never caught on across the nation is that the guns that were brought in either didnt work, were stolen or were just guns that had been handed down to someone who didnt care about them.
The local governments decided that all they were accomplishing was getting rid of other peoples garbage and spending a small fortune doing it.
I guarantee you this, if theres one diamond in the rough in that pile of garbage, the cops will be grabbing it up for their personal collection.
I am a big supporter of the 2nd ammendment but if local governments wants to buy up old trash, go ahead.
They are not taking a single gun out of the hands of criminals and they are going in debt with this failure of a plan.
Most of the people are likely using the $200 s a downpayment on a gun that actually works.
Another Epic Fail brought to you by the US Government.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hijinx
reply to post by tjack
 


Do you have any combat training? Do you understand how easy it is to disarm someone? Ever been shot? Ever been stabbed? Which do you prefer I'd take a bullet over a stab wound any day, and to be honest in your own home a criminal is at a serious disadvantage. You are better off using something other than a gun, in a high stress situation where you could send a round through a wall and injure your family. In a CQC situation you want to neutralize your target as quickly as possible, and I don't know about you but people aren't necessarily easy to kill. You shoot the gun toting criminal and unless you've hit his hand, heart or head he is still 100% capable to empty his gun into you and your home. At which point you will likely do the same. Houses aren't meant to stop bullets, if you have children in your home think about that.

Do you have High stress shooting skills? Have you ever been shot at and had to return accurate fire? I'm willing to be my life the vast majority of American gun owners do not possess the necessary skills to accurately discharge their weapons in the dark under the stress that would come with an armed intruder. Standing in the dark and swinging a bat, a firing a taser at center of mass will put the most would be criminal on his ass guaranteed.

My logic, is not flawed. I have a family myself, I also own firearms. I however will not risk using a firearm inside my home for the exact fear a round could carry through the intruder into one of my loved ones rooms, or god forbid I get taken out giving them my firearms. I'm plenty happy to put my face on a poster professing I would not use my firearms on an intruder. It's too risky for the other occupants of my home.


Isnt America wonderful.
You can own guns and choose not to use them on an intruder.
Thats your choice. Intruder walks through my front door he will leave in a bag.
A 12 gauge shotgun doest require mathematical equation of where the critical mass on the intruder is, it doesnt require me to have a great amount of accuracy in a tense situation and the pump action sound of my Benneli is enough to make the intruder turn and go look for a place to clean up his pants.
The only people on this planet that have to worry about my guns are the people who would try to hurt my family.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Besides, I too have a couple of old crappy worn out rifles that are functionally on their last legs
I could use a couple of hundred for each

edit on 23-12-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)


I think I'm going to go to all the garage and estate sales I can find and stock up on old .22 and .410s that I can get for 20.00 and when this rolls around to my neck of the woods take them all in for the cash.

I think the least I paid for a firearm was 400.000 - the most 2500.00. Why in the name of hell would I give one to the gov't for 200.00?

All they are getting is the crappy old guns no one uses or wants anyways. It’s another feel good thing that accomplishes – zero.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 



mmmmm. but it feels good, no?



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
These will be demilled and sold back to the public as parts kits. The majority will be restored to firing order!

Cheap parts is all I see here!
edit on 23-12-2012 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   
If operation fast and furious is anything to go by, then you can bet those guns are not getting destroyed and are going straight into gang hands. California is loaded with ganges especially southern california. Only a moron would turn over his/her gun unless it was hot aka used in past crimes....then it becomes the best gun laundering operation....turn over a criminal weapon and use the $200 to get a better gun.

I bet there are stupid people who WOULD turn over some expensive weapon in exchange for an IOU. Sure I would turn over a .22lr pistol that was not worth having in the first place and use it to get a .32acp or .380acp pistol. .22lr pistol sucks! Or I would buy a 9mm short barreled rifle or a 12 guage left handed shotgun. Sure I would trade garbage for something way better given the opportunity.

Bottom line is I think these gun buy-back programs are propaganda pieces by the federal government to slowely get people accustomed to less guns circulating means a safer enviroment for everyone. That could be true in europe because very few guns exist, but in america with so many people carrying(including the criminals), I think it is a terrible idea.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join