Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumHere's a Crazy Idea...Use the "Breastaurant" concept to buy back Assault Rifles and High Cap Mags
Imagine you go to the local gun show and there is a booth with beautiful women in camo bikinis offering to buy back your AR-15 (and high capacity mags, etc.). In addition to getting hard cash, you would be treated nice by some beautiful women, maybe even getting a kiss?
Extra cash for dropping your NRA membership as well!
The guns that were bought back would be destroyed. I'd bet that we would get hundreds of thousands of guns out of circulation this way - and everyone would be happy about it...
What do you think?
Cheers!
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Tempest
(14,591 posts)They'd go ga-ga over her and would turn them in for free.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)Excellent idea!
Steve
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)CapnSteve
(219 posts)...classic definition of a pun.
Thanks!
spin
(17,493 posts)
jmg257
(11,996 posts)Gunners giving up loved ones otherwise? Not gonna happen, no matter how hawt the ladies
ileus
(15,396 posts)No chic will liberate me of any...
Response to ileus (Reply #7)
Pullo This message was self-deleted by its author.
They'd have to offer a lot more than 100 cash and a kiss from a from a failed repub poll to part with even 1 of my guns, OR my NRA membership.
Pullo
(594 posts)None of this $200 - $300 buyback nonsense for an AR. That's just stupid economics. For many gun owners, guns in general are a capital investments in addition to defensive weapons or shooting/hunting hobby tools. Especially for expensive, highly coveted firearms like the AR-15.
Now if you pin the buyback price to the 10 day average of the going rate of comparable firearms at auction sites like Gun Broker and then add 20%, I'm sure you'd get some attention from AR owners. Of course, this would take Bloomberg-like $$$ + to finance.
W/O a AWB passing the at the federal level(a ban has no chance of passing anytime soon), the buyback would be a waste. Most gun owners who used the buyback would simply wait until AR's come back in stock and take the buyback $ to purchase new ones, likely a lot lower price than the current panic driven price caused by those pushing to ban "assault" weapons.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)...and, yes, it would NOT be self funding.
The real target audience would be the gun owner that bought an AR for what it represents. Like the person who buys a ski boat with the dream of taking the kids out every weekend - then realizes that the boat has been sitting in the driveway unused for a year...
Pullo
(594 posts)such a buyback might get some attention. However, you'd have to limit it to one per person. Otherwise, people would see the buyback as a simple arbitrage opportunity. They'd buy bunches of AR-15's and sell them to the buyback, and pocket all the "plus a little."
guardian
(2,282 posts)Like someone will turn in a $3500 weapon for a kiss and a $50 gift certificate to the Pottery Barn. Keep dreaming.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)there are few gunshow promoters who would sell booth space to any organization who had intentions of destroying fully functional and valuable weapons. They would also be unlikely to choose to be an irritant to the NRA by the manner which you suggest. Your post is mildly entertaining, but not part of reality, just your own fantasies.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)It won't take long for the patrons of the gun shows to figure out that they could buy an AR, turn around and sell it to the girls and pocket the little extra.
The gun sellers sell more guns, so the gun shows are happy.
The ARs are being destroyed, which makes rational gun-owners happy.
The gun show patrons have fun and make a little money, they are happy.
The gun manufacturers see an increase in sales and profit, so they are happy.
Finally, if the gun manufactuers are happy (the real driving force behind Waynie and the NRA), the NRA is happy.
I find your post mildly entertaining as well.
Where we differ is putting the words weapon and valuable next to each other. ARs (desiged for one purpose - killing at a rapid rate) have no value outside of the theater of war.
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)If this idea was implemented, I would go buy an AK (I will probably buy one eventually anyway).
I'll sell it at the gun buy back, make a bit of a profit, then go right back and buy a second AK to keep, saving me a few hundred in the process.
It solves nothing, but it subsidizes gun owners and manufactures at the tax payers expense.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)Why are you going to buy an AR?
I can't think of a single good reason for a reasonable person to own an AR.
av8r1998
(265 posts)Sports
Hunting
Investment
Collecting
Hobby
Of course do you "Need" one for home defense?
Well I guess you could follow Joe Biden's advice and get a shotgun, and fire it out the door...
Oh wait.... my bad.... there's another thread here where someone faces charges for doing that...
Hmmmmm
Pullo
(594 posts)The reasons to own an AR are many, I'll just scratch the surface
Accuracy
customizable (can fire many different calibers than the standard .223 by switching the upper receiver
great for hunting anything from small varmints to bear depending on which upper is installed
excellent defense weapon
fun to shoot
great for competitive target shooting(go to any high-power rifle competition, the AR far and away the most used rifle at these events)
low recoil
more accessories available than just about any other firearm
In short, there is a reason the AR is the best selling rifle in the US. Has been for a while. Its not just right wing extremists buying them. Lots of regular, same gun owners buy them all the time.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)Point by point:
Accuracy - there are more accurate rifles out there. Specifically, I have heard the .223 rounds have a tendency to tumble.
Customizable - part of the reason for the accuracy issues is this, right? I mean, you want a bullet that fits the barrel exactly.
Hunting - I have been hunting, and I have never used or seen used an AR in that context. It's not sporting. I had a friend who was a big game hunter, and even when he got his Cape Buffalo (reportedly the most dangerous animal to kill. They charge, and you have to hit them in the kneecaps to bring them down) he used a bolt action rifle.
Excellent Defense Weapon - If you are sitting in Afganistan fighting a war, I agree. Any gun brought into the home raises your risk of death by several orders of magnitude. There is way too much data on this to argue the point.
Fun to Shoot - OK, the two most fun guns I have ever shot: One - a marine target shooting rifle. A heavy .22 caliber with adjustable sights. I could hit anything with that rifle. Two - a bolt action 30.06 with a scope. I could hit anything, it kicked like a mule and blasted big, gaping holes in the tree trunks we used for targets. Point is, you don't need an AR to have fun.
Competitive Target Shooting - There are more accurate rifles, and serious target shooters don't use mass produced, cheap ARs. Check out what they are shooting with at the Olympics sometime.
Low Recoil - Once again, lots of other choices out there.
Accesories - Wow, really? I have a buddy in GA who can make you a period accurate leather holster for your civil war era revolver. ARs are not the only guns that have a lot of accessories.
I think people buy ARs because they can. I know a lot of vets, and was raised in a military family. These men and women have been trained in the use of ARs, and are the most responsible gun owners I know. None of them own ARs. None. Every one of them keeps their GI weaponry where it belongs when they are stateside - locked up at the armory.
Which brings me to my second crazy idea - what if we required AR owners to keep their weapons of war at an approved armory (could be your local gun range)? You get a locker at the gun range, you have the key.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)We aren't fooled. Once you get the ARs & AKs locked up in an armoury, then you will want the handguns locked up.
I don't have an AR or and AK, nor do I want one. But I well understand that to defend my handguns from folks like you, I have to defend the ARs & AKs also.
Straw Man
(6,623 posts)... you sure have a lot of misconceptions about firearms in general and ARs in particular.
Only if you mismatch the bullet weight with the twist rate of the barrel, which is something target shooters figure out shortly after they learn to tie their shoes.
What did you hunt? For varmints and feral hogs, ARs are quite popular. The rate of fire and the cartridge size are quite appropriate for those applications.
What is it that makes an AR unsporting? You do know that game laws dictate smaller magazines, right? So the old canard about riddling the game with bullet-holes is patently false.
Big game hunters don't use ARs because they want a much larger and more powerful cartridge than the intermediate cartridges for which the AR is typically chambered. Furthermore, for dangerous game they need absolute mechanical reliability, which pretty much rules out any semi-auto. Here rate of fire takes a backseat to pure power and total dependability. The last thing you want when a rhino is charging is a jammed rifle.
So you categorically deny the possibility of armed self-defense? That's another argument, but certainly isn't germane to the AR alone. And you're wrong, by the way, since that data grossly underreports defensive use of firearms.
Ah, the objective definition of "fun." What suffices for you should suffice for anyone, right?
Oh, I'm sorry, were we talking about banning only "mass produced, cheap ARs"? I thought we were talking about banning all of them. In any case, many serious shooters do use ARs.
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2008/06/shooting-usa-covers-camp-perry-centennial-this-week/
https://www.google.com/search?q=camp+perry+national+match&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch
Olympic events use .22LR exclusively. None of the Olympic rifle events allow semi-autos. That's the way the IOC wants it, I guess.
For low recoil in a centerfire rifle, it's hard to beat a .223 semi-auto. Shall we all just go to Mini-14s? Would that make us safer?
And I know lots of vets who own their own ARs and compete and train with them. ARs aren't "GI weaponry," in any case -- but you knew that. Soldiers aren't allowed to take their select-fire M4s home, no.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)"Hunting - I have been hunting, and I have never used or seen used an AR in that context. It's not sporting. I had a friend who was a big game hunter, and even when he got his Cape Buffalo (reportedly the most dangerous animal to kill. They charge, and you have to hit them in the kneecaps to bring them down) he used a bolt action rifle."
IF you ever get to Africa, IF you get a chance to hunt Cape Buffalo, and IF you deliberately"shoot it in the kneecaps" you will be asked by your PH to remove yourself from his camp and not return. If you are very lucky you will not get a chance to see the insides of a African Prison. You will most likely go on a list of "unacceptable persons" that is maintained by each country. Getting on that list means that you are forbidden to hunt not only in that country, but in most of Africa. The list is shared both between countries, but between the PH's in those countries.
"Competitive Target Shooting - There are more accurate rifles, and serious target shooters don't use mass produced, cheap ARs. Check out what they are shooting with at the Olympics sometime."
The AR-15 platform is the preferred competition rifle used in HighPower Rifle matches. It dominates the line shooting from 100 to 600 yards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Power_Rifle
"Accuracy - there are more accurate rifles out there. Specifically, I have heard the .223 rounds have a tendency to tumble."
The original 223 cartridge fired a bullet that was barely stabilized in flight. However when it struck the target, that target being the opposing combatant, it became unstable and turned sideways producing a wound far larger than bullet size.
"what if we required AR owners to keep their weapons of war at an approved armory"
The AR-15 is not a"weapon of war". No government has ever issued it as a military weapon.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I'd kick someone the fuck out of my camp for taking an intentionally non-lethal shot as well.
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts).223 tends to tumble after hitting a target. Not before. So its very accurate
Accessories usually doesn't refer to the barrel (although there are lots of barrels available. With an AR you can change the handguard, or buttstock, or anything else, which won't change the accuracy
You obviously have never been to a shooting competition. 90% of guns used shooting competitions are AR's. Olympic shooting is only one type of shooting sport. There are hundreds, and AR's make up the vast majority where it is allowed/practical.
The bottom line is there are many people that do own AR's, and I know military guys who also own AR's.
So to get to your last point.
NO.
Why should I keep my gun at a gun range. What if I want to shoot somewhere else? Do you think a criminal is going to voluntary keep it there, and follow the law. You also realize most shooting ranges are quite small, and don't have a ton of members. At our shooting range we have a small building, but there is no real security. If you stored 400 AR's there, they would be gone the next day.
PS. I never said I was getting an AR. I said I was getting an AK, so I find this argument kind of funny. I don't need an AR, I already have one.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Really? Try a .45-70 Government sometime. It'll re-adjust your definition of 'mule', which clearly requires recalibration.
Clames
(2,038 posts)...fired out of the current synthetic stocked bolt-action rifles that are popular now. So it's a "it depends" type of answer. Shooting .30-06 out of a Ruger American vs a .45-70 out of a Marlin 1895 guide gun is much different than comparing a M1 Garand to the Marlin.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I have a US M1917, from 1917 chambered in .30-06 and a Marlin 1985, and the difference is stark.
Clames
(2,038 posts)You running mil-surp ammo? That would also make a difference compared to the more powerful hunting loads available now. Put a ported gas plug on my M1 because even the commercial match ammo designed for M1's is a bit higher spec than M2 ball and I don't want to take risks with the op-rod.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)The green/yellow boxed stuff. Mil-surp works great, of course. Neither kicks nearly as much as a my .45-70. That thing is a beast. Most people will only try it once at the range. The furniture doesn't really do any geometry to dissipate the force even.
sir pball
(4,741 posts)Now, a .416 Rigby with a "modern" high-pressure load spitting a 450-grain pill at 2550fps is a different story. Or a .338 Ultra Mag in a 9-pound rifle with the brake taken off...I was curious!
sir pball
(4,741 posts)I own an AR-10(T) which I bought for the express purpose of hunting deer-to-moose sized game. Didn't set out thinking "ZOMG AR yeahhh"...I had x amount of money, wanted as accurate a .308 as I could get for x amount of money, looked in the Firearms section of Uncle Henry's weekly buy/sell/swap, and there was the AR for a good bit less than x dollars. Reliability is a non-issue since I keep it reasonably clean and I'm not after dangerous game, the rifle is far more accurate than I am (I can consistently manage 5 rounds in a 1/2" circle at 100 yards, I've seen the rifle go under 1/3 in skilled hands), it holds exactly the same number of rounds as my bolt-action .243, 5 when hunting, and while it's no MORE fun to shoot than my other tackdrivers it's certainly no less. And the aesthetics, which seem to be the huge bugbear for "reasonable" people, are neither here nor there for me, just different - like say an Aston-Martin Vanquish v12 vs a Viper SRT.
Whoever told you you have to shoot Cape Buffalo in the knees was lying, btw. My dad took one last year, the only acceptable shot if they're coming at you is directly in the forehead, through a massively heavy skull - exactly the same as an elephant which is why you need an elephant rifle to hunt one safely. They are the most dangerous of the Big Five though, mostly because people get compliant as opposed to the much more obviously dangerous elephant.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)What a ridiculous assumption on your part. Who is going to fund the buy-back of AR type weapons? Who is going to fund the buy-back of AR type weapons at enough of a PROFIT for the owners to make it worthiwhile? This was a fantasy to start with, it was not based on reality, and so far, 99% of the gun buy-back programs have done virtually NOTHING to reduce crime. (I left 1% on the table just to be reasonable.)
CapnSteve
(219 posts)No mass killings since the buy back/AR weapons ban. None.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)all of them were in a ten year window. Those mass killings also include gun fights between two gangs.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)an AR-15 buyback program with big-breasted women holding the sellers' hands as you have envisioned in your fantasy. Australia had a gun ciondiacation program. They also have seen a dramatic increase in home invastions. What was the rate of mass killings (4+) before the confiscation?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)I will pass on the kiss and keep my guns. I don't have an AR or AK but I do have handguns.
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)rl6214
(8,142 posts)CapnSteve
(219 posts)...I am not taking your guns away.
Maybe a better approach is to use economic forces to drive Assault Rifles out of the market. I am seeing that AR-15s are going for around $1500 now. With the NRA whipping paranoia up to new levels, this must be a lot higher than it was prior to the latest string of mass killings.
A wealthy individual (before you discount this - there are folks in the top 1% who have the bucks to do this) could buy up a significant share of AR production, keep the demand artificially high. Drive the prices up to a level where current AR owners would be seriously tempted to sell their ARs and new gun buyers would look for cost effective alternatives better suited for the use they would have (hunting, fun, collecting, etc.).
Would you buy an AR-15 if it cost $15,000?
Same result, with no angst from the gun nuts...
jmg257
(11,996 posts)He could then tell us what we can and cannnot do with the money!
No soda, no ARs, no smoking...
CapnSteve
(219 posts) jmg257
(11,996 posts)Clames
(2,038 posts)...and some will set up shop making cheap ones with the same CNC technology that has made building quality AR's a fairly robust cottage industry. You think the rich are going to buy up all the aluminum and steel too?
CapnSteve
(219 posts)The gun industry probably more so than others. I am sure the gun manufactuers already are making sure the many regulations in these areas are being enforced.
Clames
(2,038 posts)Perfectly legal to make an AR or most other firearms for yourself. A long as you don't sell it you don't even have to put a serial number on it.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)...If you could ONLY get ARs from Mom and Pop builders or build them on your own, that would keep ARs from getting into the wrong hands! Maybe we need a AR manufacturing ban on companies larger than 50 employees.
Raises the price of ARs, makes them less available, and hits the death merchants where it hurts...I like it!
Many years ago, I helped my Grandpa build a KY long rifle from a kit - now that is a gun I would keep in the house...
Cheers!
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)are you saying that working and middle class are the "wrong hands"? Your idea sounds kind of classist.
On the other hand, It would likely lead to an increase in smaller manufactures, which I support. The more smaller companies, and local gunsmiths, would increase competition and drop in prices because of money saved in packaging, advertising, and shipping.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Also ignores the fact that women are purchasing these weapons as well. Particularly high-capacity pistols that also fall into the category of 'assault weapon', but also weapons like the AR-15.
Remember, Adam Lanza stole his from his mother.
CapnSteve
(219 posts)...but I would be willing to bet that much fewer women buy Assault Rifles than men.
We could expand this to include the Abercrombie and Fitch model - have male as well as female models - something for everyone!
Cheers!
Steve
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Possible the industry has its marketing all screwed up. My wife certainly prefers the AR and mini-14 to the .30-06.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Stepping sideways to a Garand would only fill one of those criteria.
Response to CapnSteve (Original post)
Gold_from_lead Message auto-removed
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Basically, advertisers have been selling sex since forever.
ewagner
(18,964 posts)
benEzra
(12,148 posts)As part of a fun-n-games fundraiser, it's a neat concept, but not in the context of trying to bait me into compliance with somebody else's Authoritah. Besides, I'm very relationship oriented, so a kiss from a woman who is only trying to get me to comply with her employer's dictates...nah, I'll pass.
But I would like to revisit a statement you made upthread---that you couldn't understand why any reasonable gun owner would want to own an AR. That statement boggles my mind as much as my AR ownership apparently boggles yours.
You do realize we're talking about a non-automatic, small-caliber rifle here, yes? A Title 1 civilian centerfire .22. Not a heavy-caliber weapon, not a gun that fires faster than "regular" civilian guns, not a "badass" gun.
The civilian AR-15 platform has been on the civilian market since the early 1960's (JFK owned one), and there are good reasons why it been the top selling centerfire rifle in the United States for a decade now. The AR-15 *dominates* competitive centerfire target shooting in the United States. It's the most common defensive carbine in U.S. homes. It's the #1 centerfire plinking rifle in the United States. There are reasons for that---accuracy, ergonomics, reliability, economy, versatility, familiarity---that aren't going to be changed by manipulative advertising.
So you know where I'm coming from, I shoot a Rock River .223 AR for fun and competition, currently set up for 0-200 yard shooting with a holographic sight, and it's also my stand-in for a 12-gauge since I have little interest in shotguns. FWIW, I'm not an NRA member; I used to be, years ago, but dropped them when they got too cozy with some affiliates of the Religious Right.
sir pball
(4,741 posts)"Well-assembled" lover put on a camo bikini and snuggle me whilst I fondle my AR?
Aww, who am I kidding...at that point I wouldn't have the least interest in a freakin' rifle 
Homerj1
(45 posts)the dumbest idea I have ever heard of from gun controlers and that's saying something.