LAPD takes in 1,700 weapons in gun buyback program

[villager]

Source: LA Times

by
By Richard Winton and Maeve Reston

A gun buyback program that trades gift cards for firearms netted nearly 1,700 weapons in Los Angeles, including 40 assault-style weapons and a rifle with a grenade launcher, officials said Monday.

The grenade launcher AR-15 rifle, which did not have a grenade in it, was delivered to the Los Angeles
The anonymous drop-off program netted AR-15s, Uzis and AK-47s. The weapons were stacked in a parking lot at police headquarters Monday morning.

"We were surprised at the quality of some of the weapons," said LAPD Deputy Chief Charlie Beck.

Stolen weapons will be returned to their legal owners, and the rest will be destroyed.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-guns12-2009may12,0,5033483.story?track=rss

[TheWraith]

1. Well that's silly.

Why destroy them? Sell them to legal dealers at a cut rate, and recoup some of the money spent on the project.

Besides which, chances are that a goodly number of these are older or antique weapons, stuff that's been sitting in Grandpa's attic since the '30s or something. They'd be destroying valuable antiques. Just looking at that pile, I see at least two or three Mosin Nagant bolt-action rifles that probably date to World War II.

[villager]

2. Maybe an idea for some of the bona fide antiques. What about that grenade launcher?

;-)

[X_Digger]

7. If it was a 37mm launcher, perfectly legal / unrestricted

If it was 40mm, it's an NFA item, and still legal, but restricted to Title II/ Class III, which involves more paperwork.

(They make adapters so that you can use 12g marine flares in either of them).

[Irreverend IX]

12. The "grenade launcher"

Was probably just a muzzle attachment at the end of the rifle that allows rifle grenades to be mounted on it and fired. Rifle grenades are like rockets that you fire by mounting on the end of a rifle and firing a blank round of ammo. All the "grenade launcher" is is a bit of metal on the end of the barrel that the rocket's fins are seated into. These attachments are common on foreign military surplus rifles and useless unless you can get rifle grenades, which are not used by the US military and near-impossible to get in the US. I've never heard of a single crime committed with rifle grenades, and mentioning "grenade launchers" in this context is just a scare tactic.

[X_Digger]

22. Yup.. those 12g smoke flares are too scary

Probably something like this one..

http://www.spikestactical.com/z/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=50&products_id=132


perfectly legal
uses something like this
http://www.spikestactical.com/z/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=50&products_id=144

with

[-..__...]

23. No surprise coming from the LAPD and newspapers...

they're xperts and uthorities in these kind of things...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0115707fd8c8970b-800wi

FWIW... it's not even a launcher, it's a WW-II era finned device that's meant to hold a pineapple type hand grenade.

The launcher itself is a tube type device designed for the M1 Garand. The grenade/finned body is slipped over the launcher and propelled
by a blank cartridge.

If I'm not mistaken, the grenade/finned body can also be launched from a conventional M-16/AR-15 (if it doesn't have a during ban type flash suppressor).


Morans...

:rofl:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/05/gun-buyback.html:rofl:

[villager]

32. we should defer all authority on the issue to you and the NRA!

:rofl:

[-..__...]

40. I sure as hell couldn't do any worse.

It's a pretty sad commentary on the intelligence, integrity and "expertise" on the part of the LA "journalists" and LAPD (I mean... one of the largest PDs in the country and they don't have a knowledgeable firearms person present at a gun buy back to pass along correct information?).

Either that, or it was intentional misrepresentation all in the name of sensationalism.... a useless hunk of stamped metal that anyone can buy at a gun show or online... no back ground check or age requirement necessary...

http://www.surplusbunker.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=770

In another article, a Street Sweeper semi-auto shotgun is identified as a "tommy gun", and a Luger worth $10,000 is turned in ("Hey, Sarge... look'a here someone dun turned in a luger! I sawed one in "Band of Brothers" once. Bet'cha this thing is worth $10,000").

http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_12343624

Possible? Probably not given the "authoritative" record and opinions of cops and journalists.

I love this little gem from the same article...

"Look at this," Villaraigosa said as he pointed at the stock of a rifle. "It has an NRA sticker on it."

So, instead of saying "stolen"... its a much better sound byte to make it appear as if the NRA is supplying and sanctioning "flooding the streets" with illegal guns.

Real integrity and honest commentary there... I'll have to admit :sarcasm:

[villager]

49. Plus you have humility in spades!

Btw, not everyone everywhere automatically swoons when they see an NRA sticker!

[benEzra]

60. How about Federal Law, namely 26 U.S.C. 5845 and 27 CFR 479.11?

Or is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms just a bunch of NRA stooges who don't know beans about Federal law?

Even a two-minute Google search would have turned up this:

Civilian ownership in the United States

In the United States, M203 grenade launcher attachments are classified as "Destructive Devices" under the National Firearms Act part 26 U.S.C. 5845, 27 CFR 479.11,<5> because they are a "non-sporting" firearm with a bore greater than one-half inch in diameter. M203s are relatively common on the civilian NFA market. New M203s sell for approximately $1,750 to $2,000 USD plus $200 transfer tax, and new manufacture 40mm training ammunition is available for $8 to $10 USD per cartridge, as of March 2008. High explosive 40mm grenades, however, are exceedingly rare on the civilian market, as each grenade must be individually registered with the Federal government with a $200 tax.

Several companies have also produced 37mm flare guns resembling the M203, which may be purchased without paperwork in most U.S. states. Legally, such devices are neither Destructive Devices nor even firearms, but are signaling devices which may legally be used with 37mm flare and smoke munitions. If a 37mm flare gun were to be used with anti-personnel munitions, it would be illegal unless registered as a Destructive Device.<6>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M203

[Hassin Bin Sober]

10. I knew a couple Cook County cops who did just that.

They set up shop in the parking lot and scarfed the expensive/antique guns.

[depakid]

11. The whole point is to get them off the street

Australia did this on a nationwide basis, and hasn't had a mass shooting since. Not one.

In America, on the other hand- thanks to gun proliferation, they've become a weekly affair.

[TheWraith]

26. Actually, these buybacks have been proven not to work.

There was a scientific study conducted in St. Louis, 1991 through 1994, which determined that the city's aggressive gun buyback program had zero real effect on crime.

And do you really think that someone's out robbing a liquor store with a four foot long bolt-action rifle?

Out of curiousity, what's Australia's mental health system like? What's their poverty level? How's the drug trade, and how many gangs do they have? So you really think gun buybacks are the only factor? How many mass shootings did they have BEFORE?

Besides which, you're falling prey to the media mindset where just because you see something means it's statistically significant. You could see a shooting on TV every single day, but when extrapolated to a country of 300,000,000 people, it's an astrisk. More people are killed every year with cars than with guns, and twenty times more people are killed by cigarettes than firearms homicides.

[depakid]

28. Here's a firearms buyback that did

Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings

Background: After a 1996 firearm massacre in Tasmania in which 35 people died, Australian governments united to remove semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession, as a key component of gun law reforms.

Objective: To determine whether Australia’s 1996 major gun law reforms were associated with changes in rates of mass firearm homicides, total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides, and whether there were any apparent method substitution effects for total homicides and suicides.

Design: Observational study using official statistics. Negative binomial regression analysis of changes in firearm death rates and comparison of trends in pre–post gun law reform firearm-related mass killings.

Main outcome measures: Changes in trends of total firearm death rates, mass fatal shooting incidents, rates of firearm homicide, suicide and unintentional firearm deaths, and of total homicides and suicides per 100 000 population.

Results: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm homicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased.

No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm
homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws.

Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides.

Total homicide rates followed the same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides.

http://www.iansa.org/regions/asiapacific/documents/AusGunLawReforms.pdf

[Pavulon]

29. Jesus Christ will return at Yankee stadium before that happens in the US (nt)

[-..__...]

30. Jesus Christ is wise enough not to fuck with the NRA.

[villager]

31. Yeah, if that Jesus starts advocating for peace, they'll call him a "gun grabber!"

n/t

[-..__...]

41. Only by those of us...

who hold the nine ten amendments to the BOR more sacred than the ten commandments.

[Paladin]

42. The Second Is The Only BofR Provision That Gun Obsessives Care About (n/t)

[benEzra]

58. Nope. (n/t)

[villager]

50. And you love those "fundie" interpretations of those amendments, too -- like Scalia's and

...and your pal-in-arms, Clarence Thomas!

[depakid]

33. Sooner or later, people will get fed up the NRA's mass shootings and family killings

It'll probably take some public officials and a lot more law enforcement officers shot down, but eventually people will have had enough- and there'll be more responsible legislation at th national level.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

37. I hadn't heard about the NRA committing any mass murders, do you have a link?

[depakid]

38. Support for gun proliferation is nothing less than promotion of mass shootings

and family killings.

They're the inevitable and undeniable consequences of the policies.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

39. So anyone who supports the 2nd Amendment is complicit in mass murder?

[TheWraith]

43. So how does that compare to the US, exactly?

You know that our murder rate has dropped hugely in the past 15 years, even as gun ownership has gone up by 50%, right? So assuming correlation is causation is, at best, dubious.

[depakid]

45. Read the study- there was a statistically significant change in the rate

and the trend post buyback with respect to both gun deaths and total homicides and suicides (which makes sense, given that firearms are a far faster and more lethal choice than many other methods).

So, yes- there is a causal arrow here- and there's no good reason to believe that the same wouldn't hold true in the states.

[krispos42]

54. Ahem.

I find it vaguely scary that you applaud such behavior by the government.

[depakid]

57. I think I'll go with the data compiled, analyzed and graphed on page 368 of the peer reviewed study

which are not in dispute- though not for lack of trying by firearms advocates on both continents. Yet as much as some might like to obviate the findings through further peer reviewed studies- they cannot. A bit like global warming there.

That said- the real zinger we might want to pay attention to (the "take home message") is the complete absence of mass shootings in Oz since the buyback. Is that part and parcel to cultural changes associated with evolving attitudes toward guns and socially acceptable (responsible) reasons for gun ownership?

Conversely, might cultural attitudes toward guns help to explain the family killings in the states? The men who perpetrate them (on a weekly basis it seems these days) generally didn't go out and purchase their guns with that outcome in mind. There was something else going on. My guess is that in an insightfully designed study, multiple regression would turn up relationships.

Not to say that with the occasional Australian, you don't see it attempted. It's just that with the differences in lethality and differences with the "up close personal" nature of the methods, impulses aren't as easily acted on- or achieved.

A good example might be the guy in Victoria about 8 months or so ago who tried to drop his kids off a bridge. He got one off, but he delayed dropping the other (likely struggling in his tormented mind) so someone was able to intercede. And one also wonders whether he would, if left be, have jumped off himself. Perhaps.

Much easier though to contemplate and act on the impulses that lead to family killings when one can go down in "blaze of glory" or simply put a gun to one's head and be "cleanly" done with it. Then again, the Georgia professor who shot his ex wife and a couple of other folks took care to make sure his kids were safe, before he literally dug his own grave, covered himself up and shot himself.

The bottom line of course is that having less guns around is just a better deal- and makes for a safer place, whether in one's home- or out there on the streets.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

34. All they did was a gun buyback and the violence stopped, amazing.

[krispos42]

53. Just as many dead bodies, but more diffuse.

:thumbsup:

[krispos42]

51. Probably becaue the police don't want to sell a gun used later in a homicide

The anti-gun media will jump all over that.



It's stupid. Thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of guns are sold a day. But the politicians have to make a statement: it's not about disarming criminals, it's about disarming everybody.


And why is it a "buyback", exactly? The people didn't buy the guns from the government in the first place!


Ah, the subtle art of wordsmithing and framing...

[konnichi wa]

3. Sounds like a big incentive for someone to steal a gun.

Sell it without any worry of prosecution and get $200 in groceries. I wonder how many gangbangers brought in their pieces in this idiotic PR stunt.

[villager]

4. predictably, many in the pro-proliferation camp will hate it...

n/t

[krispos42]

52. On the contrary, I wish they would have one here.

I have a virtually worthless .22 rifle that I'd love to get a giftcard for... so I could buy a NEW .22 rifle!

[nyc 4 Biden]

5. "Stolen weapons will be returned to their legal owners"...

Many of these returned guns will be reported stolen again and sold on the streets.

[villager]

6. Reported stolen? Or actually stolen?

:shrug:

[nyc 4 Biden]

8. "Reported stolen"

Not really stolen. False reporting on the part of the owner.

[Regret My New Name]

56. heh... Turn your own gun in, get $200, report it stole, get gun back and still have $200.

Is that what you mean?

[Hoopla Phil]

9. Has there been a credible study to see if these buybacks

actually reduce crime? If not then it should be done. I'd hate to think of all that money wasted if it does not make a real difference in crime.

[tj2001]

13. It's probably a very, very small percentage of the arsenal out there

and therefore not a very effective way to get rid of weapons. (I own a gun and I have no intention of ever getting rid of it)

[konnichi wa]

17. I have about a dozen and the grabbers aren't getting them either.

It's just that simple. If that disqualifies me as a Democrat, someone can send me an official notice of excommunication c/o

[e-mail]

[depakid]

14. If it were done on a nationwide and coordinated way

and were coupled with responsible regulations- then we could expect significant reductions in violent crime.

[konnichi wa]

16. I sure wish somebody would say EXACTLY what they mean by "responsible

regulations."

Maybe you can be the first. Not holding my breath here.
:eyes:

[depakid]

18. I'm quite certain that you won't like the answer

As they would involve more extensive licensing, updating licenses and fees as well as restrictions on semi-auto hanguns, rifles and pump action shotguns.

[konnichi wa]

19. Well, you're pretty sure about what I might think of something you can't describe.

There is a word for that.

[depakid]

20. I just described what it would entail

To the extent that it's possible- were I making the policies, I'd emulate how Australia solved its problem in 1996.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

[konnichi wa]

21. Why are you so interested in what happens in my country?

Isn't there a marsupial down there that needs cuddling?


edit: by the way, from your own link...a lot of the hysteria came from OH FUCK the COMMUNISTS ARE COMING TO KILL YOU (we had our own Joe McCarthy, thankyou verymuch and no more, thankyou verymuch)

"In the 1940s and 1950s, Cold War concerns about ex-military rifles falling into the hands of communist radicals led New South Wales to place restrictions on the legal ownership of rifles of a military calibre (see: .303/25) while members of rifle clubs and military rifle clubs could own ex-military rifles. In the 1970s and 1980s these restrictions were relaxed and military style rifles (both bolt-action and semi-automatic) once again became widely available except in Western Australia and the Northern Territory."

Please keep this kind of shit up, we're learning more every day.

[TheWraith]

25. How does that help anything?

The overwhelming majority of guns used in crime are already illegally possessed. There's not a massive army of people with legally owned guns out there who sneak out under cover of darkness and commit crimes, for which licensing would catch them. Criminals aren't going to pay fees. You're just talking about nuisance regulations designed primarily to inconvenince legal gun owners.

The crime problem in America isn't the result of guns, it's the result of poverty, gangs, and decades of a grossly failed drug policy.

[depakid]

27. Rationalize all you like- but the fact is, crime is caused by gun proliferation

and we hear about it every week these days.

Like most proponents, though- you won't accept any responsibility for the problems your policies cause.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

35. So all crime has decreased in Australia since 1996?

[TheWraith]

44. Actually the murder rate in the US has dropped even as gun ownership increased.

Since 1993, the murder rate in the US has dropped by a third, even though gun ownership has increased by 50%. You're rewriting the facts to suit your agenda. Actual studies, ones based on science instead of belief, have shown that the root cause of crime is primarily poverty. The only thing guns do is make the gang wars easier, but ask the New York gangs of the mid-1800s if they're really needed. Kindly remember that virtually every house in Switzerland has a real live machine gun tucked away in the attic, but their crime problem is minimal.

[konnichi wa]

15. Yes, and they do not.

http://www.kc3.com/news/buybacks_fail.htm

[TheWraith]

24. There has been, and they don't, unfortunately.

For the most part they remove from circulation weapons which aren't being used in crimes. Stuff that was lost, dumped, abandoned, or has been sitting in somebody's attic or closet. Actual criminals with actual illegal weapons aren't going to turn them in for a $100 Visa card.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

36. Why do they hire such idiotic writers? The grenade launcher AR-15 rifle, what a joke.

[michreject]

46. I wish that they would do that in Detroit

I have a couple of junk guns that are unsafe. I could trade them for $$$ and buy a good one.

[ejbrush]

47. Only have the photographs to judge by,

but I'd say the risk of being shot by a WW1 surplus rifle has been reduced significantly. Beyond that...

[beevul]

48. Buyback? How is it possible...

How is it possible to "buyback" something that was never yours to begin with?

[JonQ]

55. I'd be more interested in the stats

of how many people actually intending to use a firearm in a crime ended up selling back their weapons. Seems to me those are the only numbers that matter, if this is about crime reduction.

I'm guessing the answer is: not many.

[benEzra]

59. IF that was a grenade launcher, it was probably stolen from the police or military

since M203 40mm grenade launchers are restricted to police/military and their suppliers by the Title 2/Class III provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934, unless you obtain Federal authorization (BATFE Form 4). Those that are in the hands of private collectors with a Form 4 are tracked closely by the BATFE, which gets to inspect the paperwork once a year, it can't be taken out of state without written permission, etc., and you need a separate Form 4 and pay a $200 tax on every single grenade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M203

If, on the other hand, it was a civilian 37mm safety flare launcher dressed up to look like an M203 for collectors and such, then it wasn't a grenade launcher at all; it was a civilian flare launcher. Big difference.

If this WAS a grenade launcher, the bigger story would be "where did the person who turned it in get it"?