#1 By: pesco, November 13th, 2013 15:57
#2 By: Cary, November 13th, 2013 16:11
#3 By: Jonas Eggeater, November 13th, 2013 16:12
Very cool, and looks well crafted. And from their mission statement:
I dig it.
#4 By: Jonas Eggeater, November 13th, 2013 16:13
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.
#5 By: Stephen Schenck, November 13th, 2013 16:33
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.
#6 By: awjt, November 13th, 2013 16:35
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.
#7 By: Jon Sowden, November 13th, 2013 17:09
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?
#8 By: Mister44, November 13th, 2013 18:06
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.
#9 By: Meg Gandy, November 13th, 2013 18:11
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.
#10 By: CLamb, November 13th, 2013 19:16
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.
#11 By: CLamb, November 13th, 2013 19:22
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.
#12 By: Jon Sowden, November 13th, 2013 19:35
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)
#13 By: Work, Watch, Buy, Repeat, November 13th, 2013 20:35
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.
#14 By: John Smith, November 13th, 2013 20:36
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.
#15 By: Indubitably, November 13th, 2013 20:46
I lost mine once.
On a misstaken path.
#16 By: sockdoll, November 13th, 2013 20:59
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.
#17 By: Jon Sowden, November 13th, 2013 21:19
#18 By: CLamb, November 13th, 2013 22:05
Yeah, this is possible until the police catch on.
#19 By: Jon Sowden, November 13th, 2013 22:41
Catch on? Working as designed, more like.
#20 By: Work, Watch, Buy, Repeat, November 14th, 2013 01:19
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 →