A republican in Kentucky voted for this.

[Agnotology]

Have you guys ever heard of principles? Precedent? Slippery slopes?

The contorted logic you’re trying to apply in defense of this is at least as retarded as the bill itself.

Yeah. This is the first I've heard anyone caring about what happens to guns after the crime. From what I've read, it's 6,000 guns this year. That's quite a bit of money, even if they average $200 a gun, its $1.2 million.

Do you take issue with the way its currently handled - being sold off at auction? What would be your thought on what should be done with firearms in the situation given (homicide only)? Prior to 15 mins ago, I've never even given it a thought.... apart from when I saw Boston PD bragging about a 100+ year old revolver they were going to destroy on FB (back when I still used social media).

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[watchman]

I'm actually with Pre Ban on this. I don't see the downside. Slightly more expensive overall gun market in the state because of a reduced pool of low end firearms?

Curious, so you think it's OK if guns are sold at a much higher cost, as they do with A15's here in MA, it's acceptable because they have reduced our ability to buy them?

Are you retarded? Asking for an advocate for mental health issues.

 

[drgrant]

The lack of logic behind this legislation is astonishing.

AKA Histrionics shitlogic:
Wah wah wah somebody feeelz bad about an inanimate object being sold waaaaaaaah "sound the syreeens!!!! somebody should do something zomg ooly oooly oooly oooh!" - Gladys Kravitz

 

[drgrant]

IDK dude. If I want a gun I'm going to go buy it. I would venture to guess most people do the same. I'm not going to say, well can't get it at auction... so I guess I'm out of luck...

It incrementally f***s up the used gun market, which screens poors from buying firearms. Imho that is always bad. Then once this is law somewhere it metastasizes and becomes an acceptable disease. It's shit like this that gives antis legs, while the rest of us want them kneecapped as hard as possible. f*** these idiots and their shitty, backasswards laws. No quarter. The downstream effects are obvious for anyone that pays attention. We're saddled with shit like BG checks because a bunch of insufferable whiners looking for "it felt good, so we passed it" sucked for it.

 

[Agnotology]

Curious, so you think it's OK if guns are sold at a much higher cost, as they do with A15's here in MA, it's acceptable because they have reduced our ability to buy them?

Are you retarded? Asking for an advocate for mental health issues.

Is Kentucky pushing for restriction on your ability to purchase AR's? No, pretty sure the FFL's can still get whatever they want for their customers. Are you implying in a state like Kentucky, that 6,000 guns somehow affecting the gun market in the state at all? Ignoring that ANY FFL in the US can buy from that auction provided they pick it up in person. Not sure how pistols would work, given the KSP won't ship and it needs to go from FFL to FFL.

Outside of aforementioned morbid souvenir shoppers, the subset of firearms used in homicides, who wants a gun that has a body on it? Genuinely? Should we auction off other "arms" used in other murders for monetary gain for police departments, or just taxes in general?

A list of guns if anyone is interested. Article said 6,000 but only showing 1100

https://wp.kentuckystatepolice.ky.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Jan2024PublicCopyFirearmsAuction.pdf

 

[drgrant]

Is Kentucky pushing for restriction on your ability to purchase AR's? No, pretty sure the FFL's can still get whatever they want for their customers. Are you implying in a state like Kentucky, that 6,000 guns somehow affecting the gun market in the state at all? Ignoring that ANY FFL in the US can buy from that auction provided they pick it up in person. Not sure how pistols would work, given the KSP won't ship and it needs to go from FFL to FFL.


A list of guns if anyone is interested.

https://wp.kentuckystatepolice.ky.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Jan2024PublicCopyFirearmsAuction.pdf

Doesn't matter, it rolls out the welcome mat for shitbirds that should have rocks thrown at their bus when they pull up to the capital. These people are like NAMBLA and others that fellate child molesters. Same bunch of scumbags. Letting them win even the smallest thing when you can easily crush them in that region is bad news.

 

[whatluck]

Well, Kentucky voted for a Democrat for Governor, twice, because they liked his father. As long as these types of things are benchmarks for voter intelligence it will be hard to keep our head above water.

The cities unfortunately get to speak for everyone.

 

[watchman]

Is Kentucky pushing for restriction on your ability to purchase AR's? No, pretty sure the FFL's can still get whatever they want for their customers. Are you implying in a state like Kentucky, that 6,000 guns somehow affecting the gun market in the state at all? Ignoring that ANY FFL in the US can buy from that auction provided they pick it up in person. Not sure how pistols would work, given the KSP won't ship and it needs to go from FFL to FFL.

Outside of aforementioned morbid souvenir shoppers, the subset of firearms used in homicides, who wants a gun that has a body on it? Genuinely? Should we auction off other "arms" used in other murders for monetary gain for police departments, or just taxes in general?

A list of guns if anyone is interested. Article said 6,000 but only showing 1100

https://wp.kentuckystatepolice.ky.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Jan2024PublicCopyFirearmsAuction.pdf

Excuse me? You proliferated for the up charge on guns and you came back with that .. seriously some posters here should be drug tested before posting.

 

[Agnotology]

Doesn't matter, it rolls out the welcome mat for shitbirds that should have rocks thrown at their bus when they pull up to the capital. These people are like NAMBLA and others that fellate child molesters. Same bunch of scumbags. Letting them win even the smallest thing when you can easily crush them in that region is bad news.

I still don't understand how evidence is handled after trial is a somehow a 2A consideration. In the event of stolen property being used in a crime, return it to the owner afterwards, and let them decide what to do with it. Do we care because its a gun? Is it special because its a gun, and not a knife, club, tire iron? Despite all of them being "arms".

Not sure how child molesters came into this, but heads, spikes, walls.

If I was to make a stance, I wouldn't want the particular piece that did me in to become some kind of mantle decoration "This here gun actually killed someone!" On the flip side, I'd be dead, and incapable of having such a thought, or any at all.

Suppose I'd have to weigh that against things like combat-used surplus guns too. Basically the same thing, except you don't ever know for sure if it did the deed or not.

Excuse me? You proliferated for the up charge on guns and you came back with that .. seriously some posters here should be drug tested before posting.

That entire sentence was incoherent and you want me drug tested? What up charge on guns on MA? If you choose to deli counter for your guns, so be it, but don't come at me for your choice of LGS. And how did I 'proliferate' it? Did you mean something else and autocorrect on the phone or something?



edit; I don't particularly care. I don't understand why you guys do. I'm open to hear something articulated, but most of the time if I don't fall in line people resort to ad hominems. Which has never convinced anyone.

 

[watchman]

That entire sentence was incoherent and you want me drug tested? What up charge on guns on MA? If you choose to deli counter for your guns, so be it, but don't come at me for your choice of LGS. And how did I 'proliferate' it? Did you mean something else and autocorrect on the phone or something?

No, actually you support the the destruction of guns used in crimes and you feel it's acceptable to upcharge for models in states for the limited access to models due to crime your words not mine. I do love how you try to wriggle out of your initial post but hey that's what Democrats and Rhino's.

Your Milsurp gun comment is just as weak ... the deed .. what did you get your friends Mom pregnant .. the deed your words not mine.

 

[Jason Flare]

This is where I draw the line.

I will not take a drug test.

 

[GL2020]

This is where I draw the line.

I will not take a drug test.

I know where you can get clean urine for a price

 

[Agnotology]

No, actually you support the the destruction of guns used in crimes and you feel it's acceptable to upcharge for models in states for the limited access to models due to crime your words not mine. I do love how you try to wriggle out of your initial post but hey that's what Democrats and Rhino's.

Your Milsurp gun comment is just as weak ... the deed .. what did you get your friends Mom pregnant .. the deed your words not mine.

Nothing, and I repeat, NOTHING I said is as you describe. You are literally reading the opposite into everything I say. Pointing out an apples and oranges comparison does not mean I think your clementines should cost more. Unless you decided to go to place that charges 50% more. That's a personal choice.

Wriggle out of my initial post? Where I said I don't see a downside? Show me a downside. Show me how it's anti 2A? And if you are going to argue economics, stop. A 1100 gun supply reduction will only affect prices an inconsequential amount IF there is no other supplier able to fill that now missing demand. In a state that purchased 300k+ guns in 2022, it will not affect the used gun market.

As far as the milsurp comment, re-read it. I don't think you got what I was saying.

Is it just the idea of the anti's feeling like they are getting a win, claiming they are "taking guns off the streets" akin to a buyback and EddieCoyle's point regarding buybacks in general? Okay, I get that end of it.

I'm all ears man, but how about talking to someone who is asking a question in good faith without ad hominem?

It's not going to stop murders, it's not going to stop a criminal from getting a gun. And it's not going to stop a law abiding citizen from purchasing one either.

Why should I care what happens to murder weapons? Is it an issue because they are guns? And no longer potentially for sale?

edit: some nice lever guns on that list.

editx20 - wording and typos.

 

[556USER]

I'd say let the victims family / survivor decide if gun is to be destroyed or auctioned. If no family or family fails to choose default it to auction.

 

[Devils Paintbrush]

Have you guys ever heard of principles? Precedent? Slippery slopes?

The contorted logic you’re trying to apply in defense of this is at least as retarded as the bill itself.

Totally agree with this. It starts with them not returning firearms used in specific crimes. They will call it "common sense". Then it will morph into other specific things, traffic violations, fights with your neighbors...add whatever you want.

When they get a taste for taking property, it will not stop, law or not.

I have had a firearm taken by the police before, they were "disappointed" that they had to give it back to me.
Years after they gave it back, I was curious about police marking confiscated gun stories, and discovered this...Officer's initials and badge number.
It cost a fair amount of money to prove my innocence. I am not in favor of destroying firearms without due process.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

It incrementally f***s up the used gun market, which screens poors from buying firearms. Imho that is always bad. Then once this is law somewhere it metastasizes and becomes an acceptable disease. It's shit like this that gives antis legs, while the rest of us want them kneecapped as hard as possible. f*** these idiots and their shitty, backasswards laws. No quarter. The downstream effects are obvious for anyone that pays attention. We're saddled with shit like BG checks because a bunch of insufferable whiners looking for "it felt good, so we passed it" sucked for it.

I think you're incorrect. Here is why.

1. The used gun market is saturated, even in states where gun rights are harder to exercise. I point to the classifieds section of this very forum of which you are a moderator as evidence.
2. There is no data to quantify the effect these auctions have on the used gun market. So your statement that it f***s up the market is unsubstantiated.

Now some food for thought.
When you buy a gun, new or used, from a LGS, the money goes to the dealer and the manufacturer. Did you think about where the money raised form these auctions goes? I think you would find it interesting... Reader's Digest version - it funds gun control! Some of the money goes to police dept budgets. A lot of it goes to funding "gun violence studies" and other such nonsense used by the opposition to advance their cause.

So I ask you, why do you want to see the opposition get that loot as opposed to the local dealer, who also sells used guns? You say you want the opposition kneecapped. So why do you insist on giving them money?

I stand by my position. The opposition is doing us a favor. I say - let them.

 

[Mark from MA]

I don't understand why we should be upset about this. So they destroy guns used in crimes. So rather than buying a used gun someone goes to their local gun shop and buys a new one. That helps the local gun shop, that also helps the manufacturer. I'm not seeing a problem here.

Is it a stupid policy. Perhaps. Will it keep guns from being used in crimes? Nope. But the policy in no way seems to harm second amendment rights, makes them feel good about themselves, and drives business to local gun shops and firearm manufacturers who could use the business. This kind of feels like a win to me and they're doing us a favor. I say, let them.

While this is correct and probably better for the gun industry as far as manufacturing goes......it attempts to solidify the mental gymnastics that "the gun" was bad and responsible, and not the person.

Again......someone falls and dies off a roof...should we destroy the house now?

Cigarettes and Booze? Can still buy them off the shelf everyday as long as Im the proper age without and LTC or permission slip.....but people use them to kill themselves daily.

Cars....same thing kill way more people than guns.... Yet they are fairly popular and no one is looking to ban them.

Blaming inantimate objects is only done for one reason, and that's to blame them for being "bad", and trying to get rid of them.

 

[not new guy]

It’s validating the ridiculous, gun-grabby notion that the gun is cursed or some shit and shouldn’t be treated normally as someone’s property.

 

[Mark from MA]

Do I have to destroy the Luger my grandfather brought back from World War II because it has Nazi proofs? Cuz…feelings. Coming to libtard america in 3 2 1…

Obviously dude. I mean....it might have killed someone. So it needs to be destroyed.

Round up all those M1 Garands, 1911's and every other milsurp that saw action and probably killed someone.....fire up the grinder and make sawdust and metal shavings out of them.

Oh! But that's good for the gun market because now we can make more of them........Right? Yeah....no. Some firearms are indeed irreplaceable and not everything is a Glock.

This is the logic that anyone agrees with this law is entertaining, and also the theory that if we get rid of it, it can be replaced. Gun controllers play the long game....in the end they know they get destroy firearms and then make new laws....its gonna be pretty tough to replace that firearm. Even if it is a Glock.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Obviously dude. I mean....it might have killed someone. So it needs to be destroyed.

Round up all those M1 Garands, 1911's and every other milsurp that saw action and probably killed someone.....fire up the grinder and make sawdust and metal shavings out of them.

Oh! But that's good for the gun market because now we can make more of them........Right? Yeah....no. Some firearms are indeed irreplaceable and not everything is a Glock.

This is the logic that anyone agrees with this law is entertaining, and also the theory that if we get rid of it, it can be replaced. Gun controllers play the long game....in the end they know they get destroy firearms and then make new laws....its gonna be pretty tough to replace that firearm. Even if it is a Glock.

Those aren't the kinds of guns being sold at these auctions.

These auctions fund gun control efforts.

I would rather fund my local gun shop.

 

[Dennis in MA]

A justifiable homicide is still a homicide. So a citizen in Kentucky defends himself and he’s penalized by losing his personal property? Get bent

I'm thinking we get some guy to go down in a blaze of police firepower. "Oops, sorry, gotta go destroy those guns."

In the grand scheme of things, I've got more important 2A issues to worry about.

 

[MaverickNH]

 

[Mark from MA]

Those aren't the kinds of guns being sold at these auctions.

These auctions fund gun control efforts.

I would rather fund my local gun shop.

So what your saying is no one ever turned in a milsurp to the police, and never went to an auction or got destroyed just because granny didn't know what to do with it after pops kicked the bucket?

But beyond that....what does destroying guns have to do with funding gun control? Missing the argument here? The bill was about destroying guns was it not?

Your saying them going to auction funds gun control? If the police that are taking them are pro gun control....they don't auction them in most cases they probably destroy them.
Arent gun "buybacks" just to collect stuff to destroy it?

And your missing mine that the whole point of this law.....is to blame a tool for killing someone and not the person.....so.....we can put guns in a negative light, destroy more guns, and introduce more gun contol.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

So what your saying is no one ever turned in a milsurp to the police, and never went to an auction or got destroyed just because granny didn't know what to do with it.

Come on Mark. We both know there are no such things as absolutes. But on a macro level 90% of the guns that wind up in these auctions are junk that no one here would want.

 

[Mark from MA]

Come on Mark. We both know there are no such things as absolutes. But on a macro level 90% of the guns that wind up in these auctions are junk that no one here would want.

Kinda how I feel about it so I have no idea why these auctions would fund gun control. No one wants to buy the crap.

And everyone knows the cops cherry pic the good shit out for free and it stays in circulation. Which as sucky as that sounds would be OK with me rather than destroying it.

Maybe the scrap $ from ground up guns goes goes to gun control.

 

[Taipan01]

I'm sure some of the more desirable variations have found a new home between the turning in bucket and the knackers yard but lot of the leftovers are not destroyed completely, instead they are parted out. There are companies that gather up the turn-ins as there are rules that must be followed by the ATF so why add in possible repercussions to the city . Simply cutting a receiver in half doesn't make it right it and which specific parts need to be eliminated so these companies will do what needs to be done for a nominal fee, if any all, as they know the real money is in basically the "kits" they have leftover for resale.

 

[Agnotology]

It’s validating the ridiculous, gun-grabby notion that the gun is cursed or some shit and shouldn’t be treated normally as someone’s property.

Aren't any tools used in the commission of a crime surrendered? Whether it be a computer in hacking, cell phones, etc. What is the normal current standard used for evidence once a case is closed and the person is found guilty?

Not guilty, they get their stuff back, right?

 

[not new guy]

Aren't any tools used in the commission of a crime surrendered? Whether it be a computer in hacking, cell phones, etc. What is the normal current standard used for evidence once a case is closed and the person is found guilty?

Not guilty, they get their stuff back, right?

Depends on if it's contraband, who the actual owner is, etc., but if it's only being held because it's evidence (i.e. isn't contraband) it's supposed to be returned once the prosecutor no longer needs it as evidence.

If a gun is used in a crime and the defendant is guilty the gun should be returned to its owner. If the defendant is the owner and they're no longer legal to own guns (because they murdered someone) that's one thing (and I'd argue that it should be able to be passed/sold to someone else if it was legally owned before the crime), but what if the defendant had stolen your gun and used it? You don't think you should get it back?

 

[drgrant]

I think you're incorrect. Here is why.

1. The used gun market is saturated, even in states where gun rights are harder to exercise. I point to the classifieds section of this very forum of which you are a moderator as evidence.
2. There is no data to quantify the effect these auctions have on the used gun market. So your statement that it f***s up the market is unsubstantiated.

Now some food for thought.
When you buy a gun, new or used, from a LGS, the money goes to the dealer and the manufacturer. Did you think about where the money raised form these auctions goes? I think you would find it interesting... Reader's Digest version - it funds gun control! Some of the money goes to police dept budgets. A lot of it goes to funding "gun violence studies" and other such nonsense used by the opposition to advance their cause.

So I ask you, why do you want to see the opposition get that loot as opposed to the local dealer, who also sells used guns? You say you want the opposition kneecapped. So why do you insist on giving them money?

I stand by my position. The opposition is doing us a favor. I say - let them.

To be clear I will concede the money here is small ball regardless of what you or I think it does to the market or not. Honestly I shouldn't have even brought that part of it up because it's really meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

The real actual issue of this is optics of the legislation and its overarching legitimization of anti-gun lunacy. Once they pass one law and don't get laughed out of the building... then that gives them an open invitation to keep coming back instead of people telling them to f*** off. The downstream effects of these laws are also usually terrible and somebody will write it f***ing poorly and then f*** it up and then some guy who got a gun stolen is going to end up losing his gun to a shredder because of some a**h***'s virtue signaling douchebag law.

 

[Coyote33]

I think you're incorrect. Here is why.
1. The used gun market is saturated, even in states where gun rights are harder to exercise. I point to the classifieds section of this very forum of which you are a moderator as evidence.

Then why are used J frames here almost the same price as new ones at the store? Not buying it (pardon the pun).