pesco at November 13th, 2013 15:57 — #1
crenquis at November 13th, 2013 16:11 — #2
jonaseggeater at November 13th, 2013 16:12 — #3
Very cool, and looks well crafted. And from their mission statement:
I dig it.
jonaseggeater at November 13th, 2013 16:13 — #4
That only applies to guns from buyback programs. It's not applicable to confiscated illegal firearms.
Edit: The article actually uses both "buyback" and "confiscate," so I'm not sure anymore.
stephen_schenck at November 13th, 2013 16:33 — #5
I went looking for jewelry made out of gun parts, but based on the designs I saw, it looks like they're just melting down the metal and using that instead.
All things being equal, I think I'd prefer the vision I went in looking for.
awjt at November 13th, 2013 16:35 — #6
Because the only thing that stops a bad guy with an ugly ring, bracelet or necklace is a good guy with a handsome ring, bracelet or necklace.
jons at November 13th, 2013 17:09 — #7
As is usually the case, the comments make the baby jebus cry.
Edit to add: that scheme is fux0ringly moronic. They may as well not bother with the buy-backs and confiscations, since the weapons are going straight back where they came from. At best this seems like (yet another) way to funnel taxpayer money into lobbyist's pockets:
Step 1) licensed gun dealers sell firearms at a profit
Step 2) Police confiscate firearms from owners, or buy them using monies raised via tax
Step 3a) Police "donate" any firearms they buy/confiscate back to licensed gun dealers
Step 3b) Police sell any firearms they buy/confiscate back to licensed gun dealers
Step 4) GOTO Step1)
The underpants gnomes couldn't have come up with a better scheme! Any bets on who the strongest supporters of this absurd piece of legislation were?
mister44 at November 13th, 2013 18:06 — #8
This is a little crude but it is a bolt face of an AR-15.
I think this jewelery idea is interesting, but the jewelry itself is rather crap IMHO. While looking for something else I did find this - which I thought looked more like a work of art. Same idea - but more refined.
megrar at November 13th, 2013 18:11 — #9
i would love to buy this necklace in particular: http://libertyunited.com/products/silver-gunmetal-aeternum-necklace but dear lord i do not have $600 to spare for ANYTHING, let alone jewelry. i do like that part of the proceeds go to charity.
clamb at November 13th, 2013 19:16 — #10
I suspect illegally owned firearms and illegal firearms and being confused. A firearm owned by a felon is illegally owned buy may be perfectly legal for an unconvicted person to own.
clamb at November 13th, 2013 19:22 — #11
Step 2 is unlikely to happen. Someone who is not permitted to own a firearm by law cannot buy one from a licensed dealer thus the firearm will only be confiscated if the owner subsequently commits a crime. A legal owner with a legal firearm will not turn it in at a police buyback because 2 to 50 times as much money can be obtained by selling it.
Firearms confiscated or turned in at buybacks are typically either illegally owned, badly deteriorated, or have been illegally modified.
jons at November 13th, 2013 19:35 — #12
Ok, modified sequence:
Step 1) licensed gun dealers sell firearms to police as part of a buy-back programme
Step 2) Police "donate" firearms they buy back to licensed gun dealers
Step 3) GOTO Step1)
workwatchbuyrpt at November 13th, 2013 20:35 — #13
Using the actual firearm's serial number is not cool from a privacy standpoint. In gun buy-backs, anonymity is usually promised to those who turn guns in. It's something of a broken promise to then turn around and reveal the firearm's serial number, because the serial number may be present -- and linked to the owner's name -- in any number of public and private records.
Admittedly, those records are usually pretty hard to get hold of -- they're usually things like gun-dealer sales records, government gun-registration databases, moving company and pawn-shop records, etc -- but the police nonetheless has no business eroding a citizen's privacy after promising anonymity.
asbrodean at November 13th, 2013 20:36 — #14
The people who destroy World War II relics to make a sloppy anti-gun political message are the absolute scum of the earth. They deserve to have their fingers pulled off with pliers.
indubitably at November 13th, 2013 20:46 — #15
I lost mine once.
On a misstaken path.
sockdoll at November 13th, 2013 20:59 — #16
I'd rather see old gun and their parts used in making non-firing sci-fi props like those assemblage ray guns Cory likes so much, or the blasters Harrison Ford used in Star Wars and Blade Runner.
I guess jewelry's fine too, though it might be cooler if the final product were more true to its source material in appearance. Jewelry making used to be a fairly serious hobby of mine.
jons at November 13th, 2013 21:19 — #17
clamb at November 13th, 2013 22:05 — #18
Yeah, this is possible until the police catch on.
jons at November 13th, 2013 22:41 — #19
Catch on? Working as designed, more like.
workwatchbuyrpt at November 14th, 2013 01:19 — #20
A little harsh. For the average person, it's far from obvious how to safely, legally, and responsibly get rid of a gun they don't want. Keeping it around the house might not feel safe. Simply selling it to a stranger, though legal, can seem pretty irresponsible. So, these police sponsored buy-backs can seem like an awfully attractive choice.
Advocating torture for someone who doesn't share your enthusiasm for firearms? Not really helping the cause.
next page →