NRA Threatens Lawsuit Over Gun Buyback Program

J.E.D

Gold Member
Jul 28, 2011
14,159
2,229
280
Jesus H Christ. What's next? The Supreme Court will give guns personhood? Guns are people, my friend...?

NRA Vows To Stop Tucson From Destroying Guns » News » OPB

The Tucson Police Department also held a gun buyback Tuesday. Police want to destroy the 206 firearms turned in at the buyback. But the National Rifle Association says that would violate Arizona law.

A line of people with guns formed in front of the mid-town Tucson police station well before the 9 a.m. starting time for the buyback.

At a command post in the parking lot, officers checked weapons to make sure they hadn't been stolen or used in a crime, and took the guns. The people who turned them in got a $50 Safeway gift card for every gun — money donated by the grocery chain and by private contributors.

Anna Jolivet had four old rifles she didn't want: "They belonged to my husband and he passed away four years ago. I haven't had any success in having someone take 'em off of me since then so, I thought this a good time to turn them in."

That was exactly what Republican Tucson city councilman Steve Kozachik expected when he asked the police to do the buyback. What he didn't expect was the response after he announced the event.

"I've been getting threats," Kozachik says. "I've been getting emails. I've been getting phone calls in the office trying to shut this thing down or we're gonna sue you or who do you think you are?"

Todd Rathner may sue. Rathner is an Arizona lobbyist and a national board member of the NRA. He has no problem with the gun buyback, but he does have a problem with the fate of the guns once police take possession of them.

"We do believe that it is illegal for them to destroy those guns," he says.
 
old cop cars should be destroyed too...

don't want 'em fallin' into the wrong hands... :)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTOg4aYGtdY]The Blues Brothers - Bridge Jump Scene - YouTube[/ame]
 
Last edited:
I don't see what you are all worked up over Josef.

I understand the rationale behind having a gun buy back...to keep the guns out of the wrong hands...but why be opposed to selling them to a FFL if that is the law?

The FFL must perform background checks, so the guns will be in the hands of law abiding owners.

What is the problem?
 
Gun buy backs are a waste of money, however "illegal to destroy guns"... Seriously? :rolleyes:


If you read the story, it is technically illegal for the local government to destroy anything surplus or abandoned without attempting to first sell it.

Rathner says Arizona state law forces local governments to sell seized or abandoned property to the highest bidder.


"If property has been abandoned to the police, then they are required by ARS 12-945 to sell it to a federally licensed firearms dealer, and that's exactly what they should do," he says.
 
"If property has been abandoned to the police, then they are required by ARS 12-945 to sell it to a federally licensed firearms dealer, and that's exactly what they should do," he says.

That way, Rathner says the guns can be put back in circulation or given away.

The Tucson city attorney calls that a misreading of the law.

Councilman Kozachik says the guns aren't being abandoned; they're being turned-in voluntarily.

Correct, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
The problem is that these gun owners chose to give their guns to the police. They knew their guns were going to be destroyed. Why does the NRA have to stick their nose in this? And according to the AZ attorney general, this is not a violation of the law, becasue these guns are being handed over voluntarily.
 
it would seem to me that the property was sold/ traded, and therefore this asshat from the nra is completely wrong, since the law applies only to seized or abandoned property.
 
Gun buy backs are a waste of money, however "illegal to destroy guns"... Seriously? :rolleyes:


If you read the story, it is technically illegal for the local government to destroy anything surplus or abandoned without attempting to first sell it.

Rathner says Arizona state law forces local governments to sell seized or abandoned property to the highest bidder.


"If property has been abandoned to the police, then they are required by ARS 12-945 to sell it to a federally licensed firearms dealer, and that's exactly what they should do," he says.

This was not seized or abandoned property.
 
I can see why the right wingers like the NRA.
Both are whiney assed groups.

If I don't get my way I will sue! You will be sorry.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that these gun owners chose to give their guns to the police. They knew their guns were going to be destroyed. Why does the NRA have to stick their nose in this? And according to the AZ attorney general, this is not a violation of the law, because these guns are being handed over voluntarily.

Agreed. I see no grounds for a lawsuit here whatsoever.
 
Even the radical left has to admit that guns are property and often valuable property. Apparently the people who operate the gun buyback make no effort to determine if the guns are stolen for fear of scaring off some of the buyback crowd who may be crooks tho trade guns for cash or get money for a gun they used in a crime and otherwise would throw off a bridge.
 
Even the radical left has to admit that guns are property and often valuable property. Apparently the people who operate the gun buyback make no effort to determine if the guns are stolen for fear of scaring off some of the buyback crowd who may be crooks tho trade guns for cash or get money for a gun they used in a crime and otherwise would throw off a bridge.

"At a command post in the parking lot, officers checked weapons to make sure they hadn't been stolen or used in a crime, and took the guns. "
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: del
The problem is that these gun owners chose to give their guns to the police. They knew their guns were going to be destroyed. Why does the NRA have to stick their nose in this? And according to the AZ attorney general, this is not a violation of the law, becasue these guns are being handed over voluntarily.


If no taxpayer funds are involved, I'm not opposed.

But if the government is using taxpayer money to buy these guns and then using taxpayer money to destroy them...that's a waste.

Especially as selling them to a FFL achieves the stated goal, keeping these firearms out of the wrong hands and putting them in the hands of background checked law abiding citizens.
 

Forum List

Back
Top