Monday, February 11, 2008

One less gunlike object.

In Oakland, one of the scarier parts of the Californian S.S.R., anonymous criminals were assisted by police in the destruction of evidence, and paid to do it, too. The no-questions-asked "One Less Gun" evidence destruction program gave each person $250 per firearm. Judging by the looks of things, they lost money on nearly every one...

21 comments:

Roberta X said...

Nearly -- that Savage handgun, despite the serious wear, is kinda kewl.

...Aw sheesh, I really am a weird-o. Drat!

Tam said...

Yeah, I kinda had the hots for the old Savage myself. Someday I'll have one. It'll look spiffy next to the Frommer. :)

Anonymous said...

Ummm, Tam?

It appears that Picture 2 shows Oakland Police Information Officer Roland Holmgren WITH HIS GOTDAM BOOGER HOOK ON THE BANG SWITCH!

Yes, boys and girls, The Only One in This Room has his FINGER ON THE TRIGGER.

Tam said...

Frankly (and sadly,) it would have been more noteworthy if his finger had been properly indexed along the frame...

jimbob86 said...

So, let me get this straight......

Bob the Burglar burgles a buttload of boomsticks from Bart, but gets bupkis for buyers, because the boomsticks are boosted. Big Bonehead Bureaucracy blithely buys back the boosted boomsticks, bringing bling to Bob, a boom to burglary, and besmirching the boys in blue. Bart can't get his boomsticks back, because they've been burned. Basically, another boondoggle burrying Bart in bills. Bart to Bureaucracy: Get Bent!

Tam said...

Bravo!

Butch S said...

I wish they'd have a buyback around here, I've a footlocker full of gun shaped scrap and at $250 a pop I could buy that Savage 45 I've been lusting after.

Cybrludite said...

Hell, only reason I still have my Leniad .45/.410 derringer now that I've got a Taurus Judge is the lack of buy-back programs around here. $250 would be a nice help on the Model 40 I've got on lay-away at the local fun store. (And half hearted fist shaking at Tam for getting me interested in S&W snubbies...)

Roberta X said...

Not to give too much credit, but "The Only One" has got the slide of that Savage back and appears to be trying to puzzle out the unobvious magazine release, perhaps applying force to the mag rather than wit to the little lever. Even if you know how they work, there were two different versions. The Savage autopistol is like none other.

But he's still an idiot.

staghounds said...

Le Sauvage, c'est un joie.


I SO wish these programms took submissions by mail!

Seriously, it might be worth it to club together, get a trunk full of guns, and drive.

250 x 100 = $25,000.

I'm just thinking...

Ben said...

Did anyone else look at the third picture and think "Hey, I think I had a pellet gun like that one when I was a kid!"?

Just wondering ...

jimbob86 said...

Dumping junk on a buyback boondoggle has been done(and for a GREAT CAUSE!):

http://www.munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com.2007/08/on-gun-buybacks.html

In the comments section. "Hie thee hence!"

Moriarty said...

Crap. A mere 3 hours away and I missed it! I have an old FIE .38 with a missing front sight and a barrel that's gone wobbly in the frame that someone gave me years ago.

$250 would have put me over the top on buying a Grendel upper for my AR...

Rabbit said...

I had a m.1917 Savage .380 that was a lot nicer than that. Sold it many years ago. I do think I know where my brother threw an RG .38 out in the Sabine river bottoms after it went horribly out of time on the third shot fired through it. A $250 return on a $68 dollar (new!) investment after all this time is probably better than his 401k is doing.

Regards,
Rabbit.

Lergnom said...

Ben beat me to it - I think I recognize a Crosman C02 gun in there.
Nice balance, adjustable sights, quiet indoors.

perlhaqr said...

I have one of those Savages. Though, I think I only paid about $50 for it. If I'd thought I could get $250 for it, I could put the money towards another 1911.

I wonder if they give $250 for $80 Mosin-Nagants, too.

staghounds said...

Now THAT would be hilarious. Because I'm sure there is a gun store in L. A. with a hundred Mosins they'd take $100 each for in quantity.

Spend a day filling out forms, take them over- $15000 minus gas and wear and tear on the pickup for a day's work.

I feel confident that if I pulled up with a hundred guns they'd shut up shop.

I have enough under $100 guns to pay for an airplane ticket to California with the profits and make it worthwhile.

I can see the TSA people-

"Yes, twenty seven guns."

Gregg said...

I don't understand how helping to remove firearms from circulation is a good thing. I do not understand how melting down history is a good thing.

I ave some of those less than $100 rifles. They happen to be Mauser 98s, in fact one was rebarrelled in .308 by steyr. How is it a benefit to melt those down? Yeah, I could make $150 each. Whoopee, at the cost of eliminating history.

Some of those old cheap firearms are fascinating, if only as a representation of people in the era that they were manufactured.


Oh, btw a Colt SAA sold for $20-$25 when it was made. Would $250 be a profit?

Moriarty said...

Don't be deliberately obtuse, Gregg...

No sensible person advocates turning in an SAA, an 1891/30 or a pre-1899 Smith breaktop.

There are plenty of junk guns (FIEs, Rhom/RGs, etc.) and wallhangers without historic or sentimental value that can and should be turned into worthwhile firearms.

You like historical arms? So do I. Do you really think I should hold onto a a mangled Davis derringer and a stripped 98 action in a cracked stock with a rusty bore when the doofuses in Oakland will give me $500 for them? With that I can "rescue" a CMP Garand before another gun-hating administration puts them to the torch.

BTW, an uncirculated 1890s Double Eagle is worth over $1100 today. I wouldn't turn one of those in for $250, either.

GunGeek said...

You said they lost money on most of them. Who are "they"? It doesn't matter too much how much they pay for the guns because they can always come take more from us if they need it.

"We" overpaid for those guns. Of course, most of the "we" people are in Oakland since the money probably came mostly from money the city took from its citizens, but it wouldn't surprise me if everyone in CA and even the USA had some change in that cookie jar.

Tam said...

Sorry. I keep forgetting that every phrase typed on teh intarw3bz is going to be vetted for proper pedantry.