Why buy back ? Vote getter ?

[Prosper]

Candidate loser?
Multi candidates now supporting buy back.
Using anecdotal data look at an assault weapon buyback.

15 million guns would cost 15 billion dollars to buyback.

15 million assault weapons would cost 1.5 billion dollars to buy, ship, store, destroy and dispose .

Assault weapons account for less than 4% of gun deaths.

Does this add up to positive results from a buyback?

[radical noodle]

1. What do you support?

Going door to door and confiscating weapons from citizens, because that's what it would take. Without a buy-back, NO ONE will turn in guns that cost so much money.

[Prosper]

9. radical noodle asked what I support.

I would support creation of a disarming task force. Two officers and a canine in a cruiser equipped with metal detectors that can detect guns up to 300 feet away. Accompany the task force with new laws that allow search and seizure for firearms. The law would end the arrest with the seizure with no penalty or record. Legal possession people could retrieve their guns in a few days while illegals would forfeit. I propose this idea because I don’t think any program could make a dent in removing guns or stopping violence. The cost of a buyback program would be the prime obstacle in implementing a buyback. Looking at how the objection to M4A is funding I think the same fate would infect and kill a buyback. The Disarming Task Force would contribute to the economy while bringing peace and security to the streets.

[radical noodle]

10. So you're saying you'd go door to door

and house to house, taking guns away from everyone? Is that ALL guns of all types? Then you'd give them back when what happens? I'm not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand what it is you'd do about all the legal guns possessed legally by average Americans.

[Prosper]

11. Not door to door, driving around.

Legal guns owned legally, owner could pick them back up after 3 days. Now understand I am not replacing any plan but offering a plan of last resort. I pointed out how here on this forum of active caring Democratics that M4A is challenged by some for being to expensive while offering higher quality longer life. Right wing Republicans will never pass a program as expensive as an assault weapon buy back that focuses on the least involved guns in murders and violence.

[bearsfootball516]

2. If one school shooting is stopped by it, it's worth it.

Ask the parents who's kids have died in school shootings if it would be worth it.

[HeartlandProgressive]

3. +1000

[aikoaiko]

5. But that's the thing -- it will not stop a single school shooting

Last edited Fri Sep 20, 2019, 09:03 PM - Edit history (1)

Even if we could remove every semi-auto rifle like AR-15s or AK-47-style rifles, there would still be handguns and shotguns.

The school shooting with the largest number of dead was completed with 2 regular handguns at VATech.

Not having an AR15 just means they go to the next available firearm. And when firearms are gone they'll use Molotov Cocktails or Pressure Cooker bombs.

Why? Because no one wants to know why so many young white men are resorting to mass violence that has no utilitarian value.

[aikoaiko]

4. I suggest an alternative such as an NFA-like registration which worked with machine gun violence.

Beto's forced buyback is costly. It might already cost us the GE.

But my main point is that when there was a rash of machine gun violence in the 1930s, the government instituted the NFA registration of all machine guns and it worked. Homicides with legally owned machine guns was reduced to near-zero rate even though people were permitted to buy new owns up to 1986.

There is no logical rationale for saying the semi-auto rifles like AR-15s are more dangerous than machine guns.

[Hoyt]

6. First, ban the manufacturing of future assault style rifles. Ban sale and transfer too.

Ban high cap magazines, silencers, etc.

Personally, I'm for banning the possession of the darn things. Yahoos can keep them if they choose. If they get caught with one, levy big fines.

I'm against a buy-back, although I'd accept one if that is only way to get a ban enacted. Gunners bought these dang weapons and it's just like any other investment that goes bad, tough chit. Plus, they ignored the carnage, thwarted legislation, and contributed to this mess.

I'd also like to see manufacturers sued by victims for contributing to the carnage by selling gunz with ads like this that appeal to gunners baser instincts:

?ops=scalefit_720_noupscale

[George II]

7. If one life is saved, it's worth it.

[dalton99a]

8. +1. The life you save could be the life of someone you love