Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,586 posts)
41. regarding...
Wed Oct 5, 2016, 11:02 AM
Oct 2016
A buy back of his guns wouild have prevented him from murdering the escort.


Correction: A buy-back of his guns wouild have given him an opportunity to sell his guns. I am unaware of a Texas restriction on a private individual selling their guns therefore that option exists with or without a buy-back program. Further selling them outside of most buy-back programs generally nets the seller more for a functional weapon. Since the gun in question operated at least once, it's reasonable to assume that it was functional. It's also logical to assume that economics applies in that a higher price for the same goods is more motivating to a seller than a lower one. I submit that a buy-back program would be irrelevant in this circumstance as the shooter was evidently more interested in keeping his gun than selling it.

However, accepting for sake of argument that a buy-back program had existed and that the gun owner, for whatever reason, was motivated to sell the gun, the only change to the events would be the shooter would be presented with the idea of choosing an alternative weapon to "use deadly force to recover property during a nighttime theft."



I haven't read the details of the trial nor even a police account of the incident. The killer's actions seem over the line to me and not something I would do. The relevance of this story to the OP appears to me as tangential at best.
Why do programs. deathrind Oct 2016 #1
Probably because it's using tax dollars. krispos42 Oct 2016 #2
On the contrary... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #3
Pushback. Straw Man Oct 2016 #12
I don't have no problems with gun buy backs. If the organization wants to fork over a $200 Waldorf Oct 2016 #13
I heard something to the effect that the law in question had been rescinded discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #17
No, the law hasn't been rescinded. The author of the bill, seeing that her bill might be Waldorf Oct 2016 #22
When it uses tax dollars, I do not agree with it Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #26
Not at all, as long as "buy backs" are not tax-payer funded... Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #34
I fully support gun buybacks Travis_0004 Oct 2016 #4
waste not, want not n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #6
you like that term "cheap hookers"? CreekDog Oct 2016 #5
not really, you? discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #7
I didn't use it, you did CreekDog Oct 2016 #8
how 'bout that... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #9
You used the term "cheap hookers" and told me you don't like it CreekDog Oct 2016 #10
i'm tellin'... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #11
pointing out what you said is not picking on you CreekDog Oct 2016 #14
I'm pretty much fine with my words... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #15
you said "...like offering cheap hookers in the hope of reducing rape?" CreekDog Oct 2016 #18
why shouldn't I bullshit you? discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #20
Maybe you should have said gejohnston Oct 2016 #21
Thanks for the phrasing suggestion discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #25
For some reason I'm reminded of gejohnston Oct 2016 #27
Let's recap discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #23
would you prefer that he or she said gejohnston Oct 2016 #19
Do you feel faint? Do you require smelling salts? Marengo Oct 2016 #28
Not at all CreekDog Oct 2016 #29
Is the term offensive? Marengo Oct 2016 #31
Tell us what it means CreekDog Oct 2016 #33
Nope. Cheap, rust-while-you-watch hooks are recommended for catch & release. Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #35
I would say it's more like giving basketballs to retired nuns in an effort to combat petronius Oct 2016 #16
Perhaps a better metaphor than what I tried to quote but... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #24
your analogy, including your lame attempt to euphemize it says more about you than the topic CreekDog Oct 2016 #30
Thanks n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #32
If Ezekiel Gilbert had sold back his guns, he wouldn't have been aquitted of exercising his... stone space Oct 2016 #36
Just a few points here discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #37
Thanks. try now. stone space Oct 2016 #38
Thanks, better now discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #39
A buy back of his guns wouild have prevented him from murdering the escort. stone space Oct 2016 #40
regarding... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #41
Your concession here is noted n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #42
??? stone space Oct 2016 #43
An inability to actually refute an opponent's argument is a concession that the argument is true. discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #44
Oh, it was just a lie. OK. You made it sound like it was something that I said. Carry on. stone space Oct 2016 #45
Here, let me help discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #46
Making up a fake consession is just plain lying. stone space Oct 2016 #47
After our exchange this past Wednesday... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #48
You can claim the last word, or you can claim great endurance and stamina, ... stone space Oct 2016 #53
He couldn't or wouldn't have killed her with any other weapon? Marengo Oct 2016 #49
Well maybe but, if it's not a gun, it wouldn't count discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #50
I'll ask you again, he couldn't or wouldn't have killed her with any other weapon? Marengo Oct 2016 #52
I'll have to correct my mental dictionary to eliminate "Cheap Gigolo" as well. Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #51
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Question: Are gun buyback...»Reply #41