City of Phoenix Gun-Buyback Program Not Affected by New Law, for Now

Categories: Guns
cash-for-guns-1.jpg
quickcash4gold.net
The City of Phoenix's new gun-buyback program won't be affected by a new law designed to fight the program, but the law could cut down on any future plans for gun buybacks.

House Bill 2455, signed by Governor Jan Brewer, prevents the destruction of guns turned over during buyback events in Arizona, but a spokeswoman for Mayor Greg Stanton tells New Times it won't have an effect on Phoenix's buyback program.

See also:
-Jan Brewer Signs Bill for Gun Rights (As in Giving the Rights to the Guns)
-Mayor Stanton, Unveils Gun-Buyback Program in State of the City Address

Indeed, the new law won't go into effect for a couple of months, and the program touted by Mayor Stanton and Police Chief Daniel Garcia -- which uses private funding -- takes place only on three Saturdays in May (details here, if you're interested).

People can get $100 Bashas' gift cards for handguns, shotguns, and rifles, and $200 gift cards for "assault weapons."

The new law -- which specifically bans agencies from "facilitat[ing] the destruction of a firearm," and instead forces them to turn around and sell the guns to dealers -- completely defeats the purpose of the gun buybacks, so it's hard to say whether any such programs will continue around the state after the law goes into effect.

We'd imagine that police departments don't want to sell guns that they end up retrieving from murder scenes down the road.

Send feedback and tips to the author.
Follow Matthew Hendley on Twitter at @MatthewHendley.



My Voice Nation Help
33 comments
gre84
gre84

If you're looking to kill someone pretty soon, the City of Phoenix has a deal waiting for you. Not only can you turn in your gun anonymously, but the police will destroy the evidence for you, free of charge, no questions asked. On top of that, you get paid. How great is that?

JohnQ.Public
JohnQ.Public

Gun buy backs are pointless and the prohibition on the destruction of guns is pointless.  Guns are so cheap and gun manufacturers have flooded the market with so many of them that taking 100 or 200 of them off the street is a pointless waste of time, energy and effort.  Prohibiting the destruction of bought back guns is also stupid and pointless because there are so many of them that ensuring that 100 or 200 bought back guns make it back into the market makes no difference.  What it does evidence, though, is our legislature's obsession with pointless, do nothing gun legislation instead of addressing the real issues impacting our communities.  How does this legislation improve the economy, education, social services, health care, the environment or any of 100 other things that are actually useful and important?  This goes right up there with declaring a state gun and allowing people to take guns into bars as being a worthless waste of time from a legislature that is closing in on 110 days and still hasn't completed its essential work like passing a budget.  But hey, they passed a law that prevents the destruction of guns in a buy-back program so all is good, right? 

royalphoenix
royalphoenix

I wonder if Eric Holder and Barack Obama will turn any guns in. If they should, will the Terry family be getting the 200 or 100 dollar cards ? peace

IdontRecall
IdontRecall

Since those guns are probably going to end up beign sold back in gun shows and through the internet again, and since BACKGROUND CHECKS are not required, then criminals are going to buy them back .....nice way to do busssiness. ...and the cycle begins again. BTW cops might going to be able to get a lot of "Ham Sandwiches".

George Gibson
George Gibson

So, no one seems to get this. If AZ pays for weapons, be it a city or county, or the state, it's a cost. If these weapons can be resold to collectors or enthusiasts who can use the weapons responsibly, then that prevents the tax money going out the door. Because not only will we be paying for the purchase of the weapons, but we'll also be paying for the destruction (which will likely be contracted).

Sandy Yost
Sandy Yost

Please vote to restore sanity to the Governors office. VOTE FRED DuVAL!

Arizona Highrise
Arizona Highrise

Some petitioner from downtown got on the train tying to get signatures yesterday. The senior ladies asked her if she was working on the Recall Sheriff Joe petition after she asked if there are any registered voters aboard. She said yes. The seniors started laughing and talked about why they voted for Joe. The lady said it was bad that we have a sheriff that can not carry a gun. The man scrolling on his tablet said, "We have the second amendment, anyone can carry a gun." I then asked her who told Joe he can't carry. She said it was the Federal government. I have been hearing this rumor for almost ten years now. It seems that we would have heard about any criminal convictions given to the sheriff since we hear about every other politician who catches an indictment. If the California DUI rumor is true, then he technically be on probation and be restricted from carrying there, but California has no jurisdiction here.

marcy
marcy

"We'd imagine that police departments don't want to sell guns that they end up retrieving from murder scenes down the road."

It's just a gun and no more likely to be involved in another crime than any other gun.

operatorihc
operatorihc

@IdontRecall It doesn't work like that at all. If and when the guns from the buyback program are sold off, they're sold to federally licensed dealers. Anyone who buys a gun from these dealers is by law required to go through a background check. The "gun show loophole" isn't a factor at all. It's not like the law vaporizes once you're inside the building.

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@IdontRecall  You should try to learn a few basic facts.  Since these are being sold to dealers, and since dealers ALWAYS require background checks, whether in the store or at a gun show or over the internet, your basic premise is completely wrong.

marcy
marcy

@IdontRecall 

Criminals aren't constrained by laws honey.  Criminals already know how to acquire guns illegally because all guns criminal acquire they do so illegally.

Feel good laws don't do anything but make the naive feel better.

squash
squash

@marcy I don't think anybody is saying that a gun previously used in a homicide (that is resold) is more likely to be used again in another crime - it's just weird and creepy to resell a gun that has been used to kill somebody.

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@IdontRecall  Somebody reading over my shoulder asked how internet background checks work, and since you don't seem to know either, I'll explain.

If you go to a site that sells guns, you'll find that they ask you to provide the name, address and fax number of the "FFL" you'll be using.  That's the local federally licensed dealer to which they will actually ship the firearm.  The local dealer will run the background check, collect a fee for the service, and hand you your purchase.

bobunf
bobunf

@marcy @IdontRecall I think you give criminals too much credit. Anyway, smart criminals are not a big problem when it comes to shooting people dead.  It's bad for business, and is only used as a last resort.  

The real problem are amateur criminals, mad boyfriends and crazy people.  Making it a little bit tougher for them to buy machine guns (sorry, semi-automatic killing machines), with no adverse effect on anybody (except unlicensed sellers) -- but, I hear you cry:  

OH, the terrible, terrible burden on the poor unlicensed gun seller. Their pain and suffering is simply unbearable compared to a few trivial massacre victims.

Of course, there's the horrible possibility that somebody might compel a list, and the Black helicopters, commanded by the Black President, will come and steal your guns.

Please.

marcy
marcy

@squash @marcy 

That is actually what the author is saying, that a gun the police sell might end up at a murder scene later.

It isn't creepy or weird, guns are inanimate objects.  With help you can overcome your irrational fears and creepy feelings.

bobunf
bobunf

@valleynative Correlation does not prove causation. But it sure is suggestive when the score is 40 to 1.  

When it comes to diversity, really??  You think our 5 to 1 advantage in homicides is because we have lots of Germans and Swedes; Italians and Irish; Latinos and Asians, Blacks and American Indians?

And among those 40 with much lower homicide rates are many countries with more diverse populations than the US:

 Israel with a 20% Arab minority population, 37% immigrants from all over the world, and multiple languages..

 New Zealand with a 14.1% Māori population 

 Singapore with a 22.6% Indian and Malay population

 Belgium, Israel and Canada with two languages and cultural traditions

 Luxembourg and Malta with three 

 Switzerland and Spain with four

 Singapore with five.

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@bobunf @valleynative  Learn about the concepts of "causality" as opposed to "correlation".

We have a much more diverse mix of cultures than most countries, each blaming the others for their problems.


bobunf
bobunf

@valleynative It doesn't seem to work that way in every other developed country in the world.  

All have far lower rates of gun ownership than the US (one-sixth on the average), much stricter controls over gun ownership, and far lower homicide rates - one-fifth on the average.

Besides having far fewer guns and far fewer murders, they also have far fewer people in prison.  

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

If you check the statistics, I think you'll find that mad boyfriends and crazy people use knives, fire and blunt instruments only a little less often than guns, so if they couldn't get guns, there's no reason to think they wouldn't be as likely to kill.

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@bobunf @marcy @IdontRecall  

What I took away from that post is that you seem to think that semi-automatic guns are (a) the same as machine guns, and (b) killing machines.

You've got some blind spots to work on before people will take your opinions on gun control seriously.

bobunf
bobunf

@marcy @squash I wonder how you would feel about buying a house in which a murder had been committed?  Attending a school where a massacre had occurred?  

Lightning doesn't strike twice in the same place?

Hummm.

squash
squash

Either way, it's just in bad taste. 

squash
squash

@marcy If it can be figured out if it was used to kill somebody, then yes. That's sick.  I don't think I have an irrational fear of anything, but I do think you have an irrational obsession with gun ownership. 

danzigsdaddy
danzigsdaddy topcommenter

@marcy good point, but i served in the military and war is a different thing to me than a victim (not trying to argue, just saying i have a different view of what i did for my country as opposed to what someone else did in the commision of a crime) 

marcy
marcy

@danzigsdaddy 

Do you object to people buying war surplus rifles that were used to kill other people?

I don't.

marcy
marcy

@squash @marcy 

I didn't say you had an irrational fear of guns but you do appear to have an irrational fear of guns that were previously used in a homicide, ie they make you feel weird and creepy.

Get over that, they are just things

marcy
marcy

@squash @marcy 

In general guns used in a homicide are kept as evidence until all appeals are exhausted so it is unlikely they would be made available for sale.

But other than that, I have no more problem with a gun used in a homicide being sold than a car used in a homicide being sold.  It's not possessed or evil or more dangerous than any other gun.

danzigsdaddy
danzigsdaddy topcommenter

@marcy @squash  it isnt that we are creeped out by guns marcy (I have an extensive collection and am an avid shooter and advocate) i just find it a little distasteful that the gun used to put a round in a cops face could be bought after the gun was used to do that. if a gun was confiscated because it was a prohibited possesor..........hell yeah I'll buy it. if it was used to take some kids life or end some cops career, i think it would be as matter of respect to not return it to the market. there are some people out there who would buy it because it is some kind of turn on for them to know they have a gun that ended a life (JAF would be one of those wack jobs) it is just a personal thing for me and evidently other people feel the same way.   it is a matter of respect, the same way they dont want people buying and selling holocost memorabelia, it is considered ghoulish.  valleynative replied to me on another link with an idea i found to be rather well thought, he said it should be put forth to the families of the victims who died if that specific gun should be destroyed or not and i thought to be a fair and well thought out idea. if it is okay with them, it would be okay with me (and i do know people who would have no problem with it, they would blame the shooter, not the gun)

squash
squash

@marcy By the way, I don't have any "irrational fears" of guns. I own three myself. I just don't worship them.

squash
squash

@marcy Idk, I might have misunderstood what Hendley wrote....but are you saying that they should resell guns that have been used in homicides? 

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...