This article was printed from KeepAndBearArms.com.
For more gun- and freedom-related information, visit
http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
Sneaking for
Sneakers © 2000 by David Codrea News item: A Brooklyn gun buy-back program had to be altered when
court officers attempted to cash in by turning in their old service revolvers.
One officer collected $1,500 by turning in six guns...(Source: New York Daily
News) That gun "buy-back"
programs are lauded by extremist anti-Constitutional politicians and their
co-conspirators in the media should not surprise anyone. After all, logical
argument and concern for the repercussions of their assault on our liberties
have never been the long suit of the "gun control" crowd and their
"useful idiot" followers. As with much of what they promote, it should
also be expected that such programs will result in exactly the opposite of what
is being promised, i.e., increased violent crime; only this time, the state will
be an accessory. Self-styled societal saviors would have us believe that "all
kids...killing other kids" really want is a voucher for a pair of Reeboks,
and in order to get them, they will gladly turn in their stolen murder weapons.
The theory goes, if you give these young worthies their pumps, further
tendencies toward a lifetime (and in many cases, generational) pattern of
sociopathic predation will then be channeled into more constructive urges. Of
course, if that's all it takes, why not cut to the chase and issue Federal
Sneaker Stamps? The expectation appears to be that you can remove a man's incentive to rob,
rape or kill you if you anticipate his "needs" and then fulfill them,
although the exact position of high tops with blinking heel lights in Maslow's
hierarchy (think back to Sociology 101 here) is debatable. That this amounts to
appeasement without limit (seems a guy named Chamberlain tried that tack over a
place called the Sudetenland, but I digress) has not seemed to occur to anyone
promoting this ridiculous premise. And while the thought of using taxpayer funds is demonstrably an act of
criminal malfeasance at best, if privately endowed civic luminaries wish to swap
athletic shoes, theater or sporting event tickets or even cash for guns, that's
their business, right? Absolutely, the free exchange of private property is the
bedrock of our economic heritage, but therein lies the rub. Exactly whose
property is being exchanged? Y'see, with no questions being asked, a new outlet for selling stolen
property with impunity (and a new incentive for stealing it in the first place)
has been created. And who's the fence? Why, the police, of course! You know, the folks who "protect and
serve." It may not be out of line to ask just who they're protecting and
serving here. And do the authorities administering the gun turn-in programs then have a
responsibility to check out the "redeemed" weapons, maybe match them
against stolen firearms reports and see if they can be returned to their
legitimate owners? Or to run ballistics checks on suspect guns to see if they
can be tied into ongoing murder investigations? And if a murder weapon can be traced back to the person who turned it in,
will the well-advertised promise of "no questions asked" provide
amnesty by guaranteeing that the evidence is inadmissable? And of more
immediate, vital interest to him, will he get to keep his new shoes? Take comfort, though. Most of the guns will not be brought in by career
criminals eager to amend their wicked ways in exchange for stylish footwear.
Rather, many people will realize that anyone willing to give them something of
value for that rusty .32 they're afraid to fire and don't have ammo for anyway,
or Dad's old Enfield with the broken whatchamacallit that's been collecting
cobwebs for the last forty years, must have more missing screws than the junk
they're turning in. Or maybe, as in the Brooklyn case cited at the start of this
article, the savvy traders will be police officers cashing in old service
revolvers because the department issued them new semiautos and let them keep
their previously-issued sidearms. That violent crime will not be reduced a whit, that the thin blue line will
not be getting any thicker when police resources are distracted from their real
mission with this politically correct lunacy, that none of this makes any sense
whatsoever just doesn't matter when weighed against the dogma of anti-gun
zealotry. The forces at work to repeal the Second Amendment tender noble motives and
carry time-honored titles such as President and Senator, Editor and Reverend.
Professionally coiffed and made up talking heads smile and joke about the
weather, the big game, or whatever, and mimic deep understanding, sincerity and
authority as they recite from the agenda of carefully crafted and orchestrated
propaganda displayed on a teleprompter. The "buy-back"
scam is just one more front for their assault on our rights, one more
opportunity to spread lies. Don't let them get away with it. Insist that all stolen property can be
returned to it's owner. Insist on prosecution of those trafficking in plunder.
Insist that weapons determined to have been used in crimes be impounded for
evidence rather than melted down, and that their redeemers account for how they
came to possess them. Then, by all means, as long as they are privately financed, let these stupid
little people conduct their stupid little exchanges. Hell, I saw a new .25 on
sale for $69.00 last week; seems I can get certificates, merchandise or cash for
two, three times that much, easy... EPILOG: A while back, I received a question from a GunTruths.com
visitor regarding gun buyback programs. He informed me that his local police
department had collected, among other firearms, prohibited weapons, and wanted
to know if they could legally possess and dispose of them without involving
BATF, or if their doing so would violate federal law. Wanting to find out, I approached the source: 24 September 1999 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms SUBJECT: Gun "Buyback" Programs What is the Bureau's position on gun buyback programs, specifically where
controlled weapons affected by NFA 1934 are involved? The hypothetical situation
I am inquiring about involves a police department accepting sawed-off shotguns
on a "no-questions-asked" basis, providing the person turning them in
with a gift certificate, and then destroying the weapons in question. Is there a legal obligation to advise/report to BATF or can the local law
enforcement agency dispose of them as they see fit? Thank you, David Codrea This is the response that I received: [stamp] Nov. 8 1999 Dear Mr. Codrea: This is in response to your letter dated September 24, 1999, regarding the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' (ATF) position on gun buy back
programs. ATF has no objection to State and local gun buy back programs. However, we
are not participating in any such programs at this time. We recommend that if law enforcement officials conducting such programs come
into possession of a firearm subject to the National Firearms Act (NFA) 26 U.S.C.
Chapter 53, they contact their local ATF office for assistance in disposing of
the weapon. NFA firearms include machineguns, short barrel shotguns, short
barrel rifles, silencers, and certain concealable weapons. We hope that this information proves helpful. If we can be of further
assistance, please contact us at (202) 927-8330. Sincerely, Kent M. Cousins Chief, National Firearms Act Branch As you can see, my question of whether this was a requirement/legal
obligation was avoided, and he instead referenced his recommendation. He can
recommend that I don't wear stripes and checks in the same outfit, but that
doesn't have the force of law. What I'm trying to find out is if some of these
locals intent on destroying our rights are, in the process, violating federal
law and subject to criminal prosecution. I sent Mr. Cousins the following: 21 November 1999 Kent M. Cousins Ref: 90140:CAF 5340 Dear Mr. Cousins, Thank you for your response to me date stamped Nov. 8 1999. You will recall that I asked you about the requirement for local law
enforcement participating in gun buy back programs to report firearms subject to
NFGA 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53 that may come into their possession as the result of
such a program. Your reply indicates that you "recommend that...law enforcement
officials...contact their local ATF office for assistance in disposing of the
weapon." Mr. Cousins, what I am trying to determine is if your recommendation is
backed by force of law. Is local law enforcement free to ignore your
recommendation? In short, is there a legal requirement and obligation for local
law enforcement to report such weapons to your or any other federal agency? If
they do not, are they in violation of any law, statute, regulation or
requirement? I will appreciate clarification in this matter. Sincerely, David Codrea To date, I have not received a reply. |
||||||||