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

@CogitoErgoSum @RTGolden1 @Bobtex As opposed to all those brilliant liberals and lefties at every demonstration from 2000-2008 carrying signs and wearing shirts comparing Bush to Hitler, right?

@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 @keepcensoringDO @mavdog @andrewlecody Not only will it not work but I'm opposed to taking away the majority's rights just because people are scared of them. 

@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?

@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.

@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 @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.

@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.

@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. 

@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.

@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?

@mavdog @keepcensoringDO @andrewlecody Maybe you should educate yourself on what a gun is since apparently you don't know. Airsoft? I'm still laughing. YOU SHOULD RUN FOR SENATE!

@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 

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.