Photos From First Presby's Gun Buyback, and the Armed Counter-Protest it Inspired

Categories: Events

Guns_Mezeul-14.jpg
Photos by Mike Mezeul II
This morning, the First Presbyterian Church hosted a gun buyback, offering cold, hard cash for unwanted firearms which will later be destroyed. The idea, as Rev. Bruce Buchanan told the Morning News, is to "make Dallas homes and families safer, one gun at a time."

As far as gun-control measures go, this is about as unobjectionable as it gets -- but not so unobjectionable as to escape controversy given the current state of debate. So naturally, First Presby's event inspired a small, armed counter-protest across the street organized by Collin Baker, a local concealed handgun license instructor.

The protest, which was more of a counter-buyback, with the pro-gun crowd paying as much as twice as much as the church. Presby collected 30 to 40 gunsFirst Presby says it collected 112 working guns, while Baker's group auctioned off about 20, according to the Morning News.

More photos below.

Guns_Mezeul-6.jpg

Guns_Mezeul-12.jpg


My Voice Nation Help
91 comments
WakeUp
WakeUp

CogitoErgoSum  proposes universal background checks as a solution. As if our government isn't capable of this. FYI to all the rednecks who just pulled off the counter-gun buy-back. You're facial profiles were all  registered into a program called Trapwire by any CCTV cameras or nearby. (Or any cameras for that matter.) Also your phone messages and info were legally intercepted.

The surveillance state and background checks only creates more fear for people to want to go out and buy guns. 

The only thing to likely change in the coming months is a wider databank. 

BTW. Sandy Hook didn't happen. Isn't it kind of funny how there's no footage, media got on the scene an hour early, and profiles of those involved get changed every day?

Nathan McLain
Nathan McLain

I wonder how many of the protesters fancy themselves as good Christians? Not sure God/Jesus would want you protesting the work of a church by defiantly celebrating how much you love your guns.

Jonathan Toles
Jonathan Toles

Why protest it just now? They've been doing this for years.

Prince Arnold
Prince Arnold

Lol I understand protesting..but learn to pick your fights, otherwise you just look stupid. Who was the genius that shouted out the idea to protest a church buy-back? Really..Smh @ them.

Scott Strong
Scott Strong

There's something wrong with you when you're protesting a church doing something that churches do.

russp
russp

US Department of Justice statistics show there is a 22.5% chance of every American being a victim of a violent crime during their life so who's crazy; those who own a gun for protection or those who don't? 

ParanoidPacifistic
ParanoidPacifistic

We should all know the playbook by now.  

TV tells us a "Mass shooting" happened. People call for gun control. NRA gets fired up. Gun sales skyrocket, media outlets get ratings, government blames video games. After about a month, everyone settles down and nothing changes.  

So who profits, besides the gun-makers and media corporations? Well, what would we be looking at if this wasn't distracting us right now? 

How about banks like HSBC, which launder money to our nation's enemies and get to stay in business. How about the surveillance apparatus popping up all around us? It doesn't bode well for democracy. 


DirtyP1
DirtyP1

It's good publicity but I can't really see this buyback really helping the community. They're buying revolvers, and .22's. The reason why people are willing to sell those is because they're not really that great if the person that's robbing you has a semiautomatic. So the logical part of my brain is telling me that people sold guns that they don't even use because they now have "better" guns, but it makes this church look like they're actually doing something.

Myrna.Minkoff-Katz
Myrna.Minkoff-Katz topcommenter

At least five people -- three in North Carolina, one in Indiana and one in Ohio -- were injured after weapons went off at gun shows Saturday.

The NRA must be thrilled.

Myrna.Minkoff-Katz
Myrna.Minkoff-Katz topcommenter

15 year-old kills 5 members of his family with an assortment of assault weapons in New Mexico.  The NRA is winning its war on humanity.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

Gun show crowd dwarf this little get together.  And they have to pay $10 bucks a pop to get in.

The cumulative effect of the notion that racism only goes one way in America is probably the most hurtful thing society can engage in. For instance, the past thirty years, government has run radio PSAs on Fair Housing. Every dialect in the book is portrayed as being discriminated against, always with the Anglo midwestern voice as the racist. Kids listen to this as background noise over the years and that is a damaging perception, no matter the race. Worse, we get a President who appears to be engaging in payback. Victor Frankl said - There are only two races, the decent and the indecent. Just decide which race you want to belong to.

Here in the big cities, we redistrict along strict race lines, the Hispanics sue because the blacks are over-represented and they loudly decry they are the new race in town. And this newspaper cheers them on while the decent folk flee to the suburbs - and the fasted demographic to haul ass are the black families.

This is getting worse, not better, and it's now coming from all factions. We lost our groove.

With all our warts, E Pluribas Unum - out of many, one - NOT multiculturalism, allowed this miracle we call America to work. We have violated that and now, all the races are arming themselves.

Oh well.  There's still one place where all the races get together and exhibit camaraderie - at the big gun shows.  Two weeks ago I went to the big Dallas Gun Show and all the races were proportionally there, and it brought a tear to my eye.


Bobtex
Bobtex

The guy in the Hitler t-shirt looks like he is ready to engage in a civil debate about the Constitution and the duty of the government to protect its citizens.  Frankly, he and his partners-in-hate are more dangerous to most citizens than some imaginary gun-seizing Nazi fantasy.

keepcensoringDO
keepcensoringDO

"Rev. Bruce Buchanan says as long as they took it one gun, his event would be a success."

It's always wrapped in this false altruism. 

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

I was at this event, and if you stopped by you likely heard me. I urged people to sell their guns for more money and then donate the difference. Why take $50 from a church when you can sell the gun for $100 or more and then DONATE some or all of that money?

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@Jonathan Toles 

This is the first I had heard of it. I don't normally follow or look for gun-buybacks. Personally, I am of the opinion that you can do more good by selling the unwanted gun to a good person and then donate some or all of that money to a good cause. Basically, you can either take $50 from Stewpot (which could have gone to feeding people) or you can sell the gun and donate money to them.

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@Scott Strong First, it wasn't a protest, it was an alternative way for people to sell their guns.  The DO called it a protest.  Second, there's nothing wrong with protesting anything you disagree with.  The Westboro Baptist Church disrupts military funerals because they think the LGBT community is taking the country on a toboggan ride to Hell.  Is there something wrong with people who protest against that?

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum topcommenter

@russp Well, it's a bit more complicated than that. If you live close to a large city, your chances of being a victim of crime greatly increase. If you live in a rural area, your chances are much smaller. The inner-city crime rates skew the national average so that it looks worse than it is for many tens of millions of us who live in suburbs or rural areas. Further, very few proponents of gun control are calling for an outright ban or confiscation. Most are calling for universal background checks and tighter restrictions on what type of guns consumers can legally purchase, among other measures. Self-defense is still recognized by most as a valid reason for keeping a firearm at home. However, keep in mind that, just by the fact that one owns a handgun, the chances of a shooting from domestic violence or suicide vastly increase as well.

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum topcommenter

@ParanoidPacifistic With the president's speech, executive orders and calls for Congress to take action, it would seem that the playbook is being rewritten to some extent.

NotAnon
NotAnon

@DirtyP1 It seems futile but if that's what makes people sleep better then let it be.  I'm sure if they want a gun they can buy one right now.  Hell, I'm not so sure that the "protesters" weren't just hoping to turn the guns around the next day.

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul
ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz

 If you keep the boogerhook off of the bangswitch, these things don't happen.


Also an unloaded weapon, never hurt anyone.


And last but not least:


Always assume that a weapon is loaded when you are handling it.

ruddski
ruddski

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz

In Oklahoma this past weekend, a home invasion by 5 people was thwarted when two of them were shot by the homeowner and friend

Last week, a 14-year-old boy in North Carolina shot an intruder dead after 4 men broke into the home where he and his sister were alone.

Last week, a woman in Gorgia at home with her children shot an intruder who was stalking them in their home.

There's more, of course, and the NRA is no doubt thrilled.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz 

about as rare as Mad Cow disease.  And government reacts like it's the Bubonic Plaque.

ruddski
ruddski

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz - And 17 people were shot in the President's home town of Chicago over the weekend, two were killed. Capitalism is winning it's war on Chicagoans.

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@Bobtex Got all that from a T-shirt huh?  The error in his portrayal is matched only by your own.

plfarmer
plfarmer

@keepcensoringDO Rev Buchanan has been feeding the hungry and clothing the naked for at least 15 years that I know of. And 1st Pres has had the Stewpot for at least 35 years that I know of.-false altrusium- you should be embarrassed to display such a lack of knowledge and respect for such a great man and organization.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@andrewlecody 

why would anyone pay more than fair market value for these guns?

russp
russp

@CogitoErgoSum @russp 

But in the usual rush to do something, they are suggesting a ban on the least used weapon in homicides, the assault rifle. Knives, clubs, shotguns and even bare hands all are used more than all rifles combined. The universal background check is the only thing so far that makes any sense.

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum topcommenter

@andrewlecody @Myrna.Minkoff-Katz Did you know that Bush actually oversaw the first gun-walking operation, called Operation Wide Receiver, in 2006? Many of the guns they sent across the border also were not recovered. Obama was merely (and unfortunately) following Bush's lead -- only difference is that this time it resulted in documented civilian deaths. Let's not even talk about the thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of civilian men, women and children killed in Iraq over some nonexistent WMDs.

keepcensoringDO
keepcensoringDO

@plfarmer @keepcensoringDO What does any of that have to do with this? He could be the son of Jesus himself and it wouldn't mean this gun grab made a single person safer. 

What about when a grandmother that turned in her pistol gets murdered by thugs? I guess he made it safer for the thugs. 

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

 @mavdog 

$50 was not fair market for many of the guns, as many of them were sold for over $200 at the gun rescue.

By selling a gun to Stewpot for $50, you are directly depriving them of that money (unless they were sponsored). That is $50 that could have gone towards helping the homeless and other at-risk people. Instead, I urged people to sell their gun at a fair price (usually over $200) and then donate some or all of that money towards a good cause (maybe back to Stewpot!).

Scruffygeist
Scruffygeist

@russp Perception matters. The perception is that assault rifles are over-the-top and unnecessary, so that's what they're going to target. And, except for certain situations, they are likely over-the-top. Plus no politician in their right mind believes there's any way under the sun that handguns could be restricted.

ruddski
ruddski

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz @ruddski 

Your own paranoia and emotionalism is likely why you see rational people as some sort of enemy, and assume their paranoia. Your prism is sad, but that's your problem.

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@CogitoErgoSum @andrewlecody @Myrna.Minkoff-Katz Couple of flaws in your logic.  Wide Receiver was much smaller scale than FF.  Most of the firearms in WR were recovered, the Bush administration stopped it when they discovered the Cartels were removing the tracking devices. (Something I'm sure Holder/Obama were aware of)  Holder rebooted the operation as FF without correcting the faults that caused it to stop in the first place.  The other scope and scale of Fast/Furious dwarfed Wide Receiver and the consequences followed suit.  Are you saying that Holder/Obama get a pass for being stupid because someone else was stupid first?  How about we question why they didn't learn from the documented mistakes of the previous operation?  Stupid is as Stupid does.

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@CogitoErgoSum @keepcensoringDO @mavdog @andrewlecody

First, mavdog you stated suppressor which is also known as a silencer or sound supressor. A flash suppressor (commonly reffered to as a flash hider) is a wholly different device, and completely pointless to ban.

Please read through the wikipedia article on the Federal Assault Weapon Ban, in the "Criteria of an assault weapon" section it states:

"In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of cosmetic features from the following list of features"

CogitoErgoSum, banning specific types of firearms or features is pointless the bad guys will just use something else. To combat drunk driving did we outlaw specific types of cars or beers? No, we made attached the problem at it's root, the people driving drunk. We made it socially unacceptable to drive drunk and we increased the penalties for doing so.

We need to attack the violence problem at it's roots. Here are a few suggestions:

* Legalize weed, this will severely disrupt gang finances and provide additional tax revenue at the same time

* Work to remove the social stigma around seeking mental or psychological help. People with otherwise treatable conditions are being driven away from seeking help because they don't want to be labeled as "crazy".

* Work on improving education and job skills, especially in poor areas to give kids better choices then joining gangs.

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum topcommenter

@keepcensoringDO @mavdog @andrewlecody I have the feeling that you would never allow for the possibility that a ban of any type -- no matter how well thought out, overflowing with your vast knowledge of small arms and thorough -- would ever make a difference. So, your solution is to do nothing because it might not work, right?

CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum topcommenter

@andrewlecody @mavdog MY issue with selling a gun to the private buyers is the fact that they have not been background-checked. I do not want to put my gun into a system that does not make every effort to determine whether a buyer is fit to own a gun.

keepcensoringDO
keepcensoringDO

@mavdog @andrewlecody FLASH SUPPRESSOR. Again.. you don't even know what you are talking about. Just like the people who wrote the bill(Biden, Feinstein still haven't learned anything) the first time. Stupid legislation written by stupid people to make stupid people feel good.


It accomplished none of it's stated purpose. In fact-- reaction to the bill caused more deaths than it ever stopped. Part of the bill called a pistol over a certain weight an "assault weapon." Ok.. so what happened? A new generation of ultra light more concealable and more deadly hand guns. Many of which.. get this.. end up in the hands of criminals who had no compunction against using them to murder people.


Like I said.. you should run for Senate. You'd fit right in with the rest of the ignorant bumbling fools.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@andrewlecody

wiki disagrees with your comments: During the period 1994–2004 variants with certain features such as collapsible stocks, %s, and bayonet lugs were prohibited for sales to civilians by the %s

%s

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@mavdog @andrewlecody 

You are completely wrong on the '94 federal assault weapon ban (and the handful of states that still have it).

Many AR-15 models were made illegal specifically by name. As well as many of the features (primarily cosmetic or ergonomic) were banned when two or more were used on a semi-automatic rifle that accepted detectable magazines (which were also limited to 10 rounds under the ban). The ban was wholly ineffective in reducing crime, as "assault weapons" and rifles in general are used is a astonishingly small number of crimes.

The manufacture and sale of new fully automatic firearms has been illegal to civilians since 1986, per an amendment in the Firearm Owners Protection Act. The National Firearms Act of 1934 created a tax of $200 and registry for fully automatic firearms, since that time TWO have been used in a crime, one by a police officer. Due to the '86 ban, fully automatic firearms are nearly impossible to come by legally, as they must have been made and registered prior to 1986. The current prices for a fully automatic AR-15 are in the tens of thousands of dollars and require significant amounts of paperwork and time (up to 6 months or more) for transfer/sale. The prices also rise by around 10% or more per year, making them great investments.

Silencers/Suppressors are legal and are also covered under the NFA with the $200 tax and registration. The '94 AWB did not cover them, other than making some firearms not be able to include threaded barrels for their attachment. These devices should not be, as they are primarily a safety device. Sadly, Hollywood likes to portray silencers as magical device for making firearms completely silent, when in reality they drop the noise from instant hearing loss to lawnmower.

Also of note, contrary to popular belief modern firearms such as the AR-15 can not be easily and readily converted to full auto or burst. The ATF tends to put the screws to anyone producing a firearm that can be quickly converted to full auto.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@andrewlecody

believe the AR 15 was not banned under the Assault Weapons act, only the ability to add suppressors and make it fully automatic.

The registry is not only to solve a crime, it is to establish responsibility. If you own a gun and that gun is used in a crime, you should have liability.

you'll have to excuse keepcensoringDO, he likes to make a fool of himself (which btw keeps most of us laughing), and he frequently types the word "vagina" because that's as close as he ever gets to one.

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@keepcensoringDO @andrewlecody @mavdog

Please keep this kind of vitriol out of the discussion (here or anywhere else), it does us no good to have "pro-gun" people look like jerks.

Self-defense is a human right, and I believe the firearm debate crosses political boundaries. Lets not alienate anyone who agrees with the right to keep and bear arms, they could be liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, libertarian, independent, etc.

Remember, there are plenty of Republicans that would love to throw us (gun owners) under the bus if it would help them stay in office.

keepcensoringDO
keepcensoringDO

@andrewlecody @mavdog Mavdog is a retarded liberal who thinks airsoft guns are "functional firearms" there is no point in trying to use facts against someone who is emoting out of their menstruating vagina. 

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@mavdog @andrewlecody 

Please explain why an AR-15 is not suitable for self defense. The AR-15 platform is accurate (so you don't hit the wrong person), modular/adjustable (so it can be customized to the shooter, allowing for better aim) and reliable (not likely to explode in your face).

I'm ok with anyone who has been 302'd being unable to purchase firearms for a short period of time (say a year or more) as long as a system is in place to contest the loss of rights for anyone wrongfully committed.

In Texas you are already liable if a child can gain access to your firearm. If the person themselves uses it in a crime they are already liable for the crime, which many crimes already having enhanced penalties for use of a deadly weapon. To help ensure safe storage, we should offer tax breaks or credits for the purchase of firearm safes. As well as tax incentives for safety classes.

I oppose the idea of creating a firearm registry, for a number of reasons. One in particular is that these types of registries have been utterly useless in helping to solve crimes. Canada recently got rid of their registry as it was a drain on resources with no benefit.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@andrewlecody 

which weapons should be "banned"? it would seem that a weapon that is not primarily made for hunting /reasonable self defense should be considered. that would also include ammunition.

I am advocating strict regulation, total clearance of any gun sale thru NICS, and a mandatory program for anyone under care for mental issues to be included in the NICS database. gun owners should be held liable for the use of their gun in a crime be it by them or others, as it is up to the owner to ensure the gun is adequately secured. guns should be documented as to ownership to identify who has responsibility.

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@RTGolden1 @mavdog @andrewlecody

I didn't coin the term "gun rescue", I'm just using what the group called it. That said, I have heard rescue used for initiatives to restore historic buildings, artwork, etc, so it does not seem absurd to me.

I am glad that you agree that it makes no sense to apply motive or malice to an inanimate object.

On the topic of the "contradiction", let's look at what was said. One person said "a lot of these guns" and I said "many of the guns", neither of those phrases is exclusionary. While some guns were in working order, some where not, still others were non-working but serviceable (this means able to be repaired). So when the first posted said "a lot of these guns don't even work", all of those firearms could easily fall under the category of serviceable.

On the topic of firearms knowledge, can you describe to me why you believe certain types of weapons should be banned and what should be used to define those weapons?

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@mavdog @andrewlecody Does having a 'rescue' for an inanimate object make any less sense than applying the label 'evil' to the same object?

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@keepcensoringDO @mavdog @andrewlecody 

"educate" myself on buying guns? not needed. will never require such.

does anyone need to understand the different models of guns to know they should be regulated? absolutely not.

why don't you explain the contradiction of your "grandma's attic" and  "guns that don't even work" comments and what was said by andrewlecody?

too funny.

keepcensoringDO
keepcensoringDO

@mavdog @andrewlecody Aahahahahhaah. Airsoft? Talk about funny. Maybe you should educate yourself a little bit on the subject before you go around telling everyone else what to do and what they "need" or don't. 

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@andrewlecody

the listings were for "airsoft". apparently that is not a functional gun.

don't buy guns, so really have no reference other than going online. so here is cash america's site for used handguns: http://www.gunauction.com/search/auctions.aspx

so a working handgun, in fair condition, can be bought for as little as $105.

being blunt, a non-working gun wouldn't sell for as much as a functional, working gun, would it?

no, it wouldn't.

regardless, the use of the phrase "gun rescue" is truly absurd. using the moniker "rescue" on an inanimate object such as a gun shows some serious issues by those who would apply it. it does explain however why someone would feel the need go and disrupt the First Presby event.

andrewlecody
andrewlecody

@mavdog 

I am normally not so blunt, but you are wrong on prices and it is possible you are lying intentionally.

Craigslist has a no firearms policy, that is enforced, so I am sure you did not use it as a reference for prices.

There were plenty of working or serviceable firearms sold on both sides of Saturday's buyback/rescue. There were a few instances of old guns that likely were not functional but could be fixed, selling for more than $100.

Sure some of the firearms sold to Stewpot were non-functional, but I bet many of those still would have gone for more than $50 on the "rescue" side.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@andrewlecody

"gun rescue"? seriously?

looking at sites such as craigslist, most old guns (such as in the pictures) are priced less than $40. these at the event must have been some nicer guns, which is odd that the owners wouldn't have taken the valuable guns to a pawn shop already. seems to not make much sense that these guns were worth what you suggest.

apparently the other poster was wrong about these being "not even working" from "Grandma's attic", huh?

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...