Richardson: Arizona cities shouldn’t be turned into gun supermarkets
Bill Richardson
Retired Mesa master police officer Bill Richardson lives in the East Valley and can be reached at bill.richardson@cox.net.
Welcome to the discussion.
-
Current users sign in here.
30 comments:
Rules of Conduct
© Copyright 2013, East Valley Tribune, Tempe, AZ. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]
A Division of 10/13 Communications
teknik posted at 8:56 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
all those guns that easily make it into the hands of criminals are profits for the manufactures, all the guns the get shipped out of the country by various criminal entities are profits for gun manufactures
chatmandu002 posted at 9:56 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Bill,
You missed the mark again. Nothing in ARS 12-941 requiring the sale of guns, only if they do the money goes to the general fund.
12-941. Disposal of certain unclaimed property in the custody of a state, county, city or town agency
A. A state, county, city or town agency shall dispose of all property that was used as evidence and that remains unclaimed in the hands of the agency, after final disposition of the cause in which so used, or that was seized by a peace officer as being used unlawfully or for an unlawful purpose and that was held unclaimed from the date of seizure, or that came into the hands of the agency as unclaimed or contraband. A law enforcement agency may retain and use those items that have a useful value to that law enforcement agency.
B. Found property turned over to a state, county, city or town agency may be returned to the person who found and turned it over if all of the following conditions apply:
1. The property is not contraband.
2. The property remains unclaimed for thirty days after reasonable efforts have been made to locate and notify the owner.
3. The person who found and turned over the property is not a public officer or employee of the federal, a state or a local government who found the property in the course of performing the duties of the office or employment.
C. If United States currency is delivered to the proper agency pursuant to subsection A of this section, it shall be deposited in the general fund of the state, county, city or town, as the case may be.
D. A record of all transactions shall be maintained for at least twenty-four months.
Deddzone posted at 9:59 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Guns used in crimes should NEVER be resold. They should be used only as exhibit A in court and melted down afterward.
Kirkthe1 posted at 10:06 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Most of what I read is a bunch of single minded, illogical approach to serious implications. I was a police officer for several years. There is not a single firearm that ever killed a human being without human intervention. To identify an animated object as evil is assine to say the lease. What I do agree with is going after the illegal gun sellers...like the US Gov't for its idiotic gun-running program. These people ought to be rounded up and hanged. This applies equally to anyone who uses a firearm or weapon for evil purposes.
Local governments selling firearms, or any weapons, lawfully secured via investigations or confiscation, should be able to sell them back to "lawful" citizens through legitimate firearms dealers. A bulk of the proceeds can go into a fund for those families that suffered from the illegal and evil acts of the human operators.
Lastly, it does not matter what municipality participates in this. Evil will act where it wills. Good folk will come to defend their homes and communities. And most likely from a firearm, a rock, a car, a fist, and even with their very lives.
hdlvr posted at 10:25 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
I would be very curioius to find out what Mr. Richardson's opinion is regarding antique/collectable firearms - What about an old Sharps Rifle from the Civil War? A Colt Single-Action pistol from the wild west? An M-1 Garand rifle that has seen action in WWII?.......Should all of these firearms be destroyed? Certainly, many weapons such as these have been used to take lives.....
Firearms are inanimate objects - They do not have brains, and do not operate themselves. Enough said!
Masterrogue666 posted at 10:49 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
If I'm correct, most PD's have a weaponsmith. If guns can't be repaired so that they aren't "potentially dangerous", then they could be broken down, and sold as scrap.
As for the history of the weapon, catmandu002 and hdlvr have valid points. People kill, using a variety of methods. Are we to act the same way with all the methods that have been used over the years?
az2008 posted at 11:07 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
I think cars which have taken a life should be sold as scrap. Pools in which a child has drowned should be filled in. It will teach their peers a lesson.
Fwd4fun posted at 11:14 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
The posts here for the most part are correct , Weponds are inanimate objects , look at all the historic weponds out there ,which have killed thousnds of people .... to be more correct the PEOPLE who carried them Killed. The gun that killed Lincon is in a Museum, along with many other weponds....
samkat posted at 11:25 am on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Bill: You are beginning to sound like Mike McMecellan. You did not make yourself clear on who is allowed to purchase and retain firearms.
Furthermore, using your logic, who would want to purchase the house or any other property of someone who had killed another person? Should we burn the house down or scrap their vehicles? Do we take their other possessions to the dump? What about the weapon used by a cop to take out someone? Do we apply the same action you had described?
It is necessary to apply a little common sense to every situation.
PS: Should we require every weapon sold to come with a pedigree? If I purchase, say a used shotgun from Bass pro should they provide the weapon's history with it? I am sure the last owner would not be too pleased.
hamguy posted at 12:24 pm on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Nothing wrong with selling a weapon to a legal user no matter how it had been used. My main thought is the people that say they buy the gun for protection and it is interesting the response I get when I ask them if they really believe the could shoot another man quickly enough to change a situation. Most new buyers have never shot an animal much less a human and without that will, I feel the weapon is more a liability than an asset. Training both in the mental aspect and the mechanics of gun handling is needed I feel.
az2008 posted at 1:08 pm on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Richardson's article exemplifies a primitive form of reasoning known as "scapegoating," which goes back many centuries. In ancient Greece, if a man's sword took a life it would be banished outside the city's walls. If a canoe failed to carry an individual across water it would be put on trial and destroyed upon conviction.
It was a way to bring simple answers to seemingly unexplainable evil. Something was wrong, and punishment was applied. That's all that mattered.
To learn more about this topic, Google for the 1995 Louisiana State Univ. Journal of Ideology, "The Ideology of Gun Ownership and Gun Control" by Koppel. See pages 15-17.
It is here: http://www.guncite.com/journals/dk-ideo.html#pg15
Arizona Willie posted at 5:12 pm on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
az2008: good post! Richardson is trying to apply an emotional " argument " to an inanimate object.
The previous owner of the weapon is the person who used it to kill ( presuming it wasn't stolen ). The gun didn't do anything by itself.
But, if you've read very many of Richardson's articles you know better than to expect logic from him. He's been on a one man crusade against Sheriff Joe and the Tempe and Mesa police departments and this is just him attacking from another angle.
Brindy posted at 5:59 pm on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
There is only one thing more predictable than the sun rising every morning, and that is the illogical rants of this retired single subject traffic investigator.
tededitedit posted at 8:56 pm on Sat, Jan 12, 2013.
Guns are one of those places where "the rubber meets the road" as far as morality is concerned. They are a wholesome activity and protection for the law-abiding citizens, a necessity for law enforcement and sworn soldiers. They are instant power for the weak and a tool for criminals. They are the fast track to a selfish end for the lost. What to do? Tax the sale of manufactured firearms very heavily, qualify gun purchasers more stringently, melt down EVERY confiscated weapon as soon as it is legal to do so, punish gun violations and crimes steadfastly.
DonMey posted at 8:55 am on Sun, Jan 13, 2013.
Just curious: What happens to a gun fired by a police officer in a shooting? Are they destroyed? Or are you only concerned about owning a gun that killed a father/mother/brother/daughter/son if they were a cop?
billrichardson posted at 10:46 am on Sun, Jan 13, 2013.
I'll try and answer everyone's questions and concerns.
DonMey-The last I knew officers weapons are returned to them when they go back on duty.
Brindy and Leon-I never worked in the traffic unit. MPO's at Mesa PD were assigned arson, homicide, intelligence, sex crimes and traffic units.
Samkat-Common sense was the driving force before the legislature butted in and decided they knew what was best for cities. In years past guns were sold at auction based on the policies of each city. One size doesn't fit all. The state legislature looks more and more like the Congress everyday where politicians shove unfunded mandates and bad public policy down the throats of cities and you and me.
hdlvr-See the response above. It should be up to the cities what they do with weapons.
charmandu002-If it were as simple as that.
scyntax posted at 6:02 pm on Sun, Jan 13, 2013.
All I can say Bill is thank you. Thank you for providing us pro 2nd amendment types with another laughably inane diatribe.
Accuracy posted at 8:33 am on Mon, Jan 14, 2013.
“Arizona cities shouldn’t be turned into gun supermarkets” . . .
But since President Obama's domestic agenda aimed at new gun laws – gun retailers say a surge in gun sales has reached a record high in December and has continued into 2013.
DonMey posted at 11:42 am on Mon, Jan 14, 2013.
Bill - Thanks for the response.
hillstreet posted at 3:33 pm on Mon, Jan 14, 2013.
Another rarity, Bill. Second time you write something I agree with. Been a cop for almost 30 years and we always destroyed firearms involved in crimes for obvious reasons. Or at least obvious to rational people. Once the gun 2nd Amend. and Obama hating nuts get involved, like our quick draw (pun intended) Legislature, reason goes out the window and emotions take over. No firearms used in crimes should ever be placed back out on the streets. Plain common sense; common sense is not very common, though.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 4:02 pm on Mon, Jan 14, 2013.
I see that ex-Master Mesa Police Officer Richardson has removed my latest comment asking what was the Mesa P.D. conviction rate of the 1,400 rapes that occurred in Mesa from 2002 - 2011.
So I will ask ex-Master Mesa Police Officer Richardson a different question because he doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to answer my first question.
Here, goes, ex-Master Mesa Police Officer Richardson....why are there always the same number of reported thefts, burglaries, stolen vehicles and strong-arm robberies reported in the Mesa Republic's Weekly Crime Log ???
Funny how the number of these thefts is always around 90. One week it's 86, the next week 89, then 90, then 88....week in and week out. Is that even within ..."statistically probability" ???
And, ex-Master Mesa Police Officer Richardson, can you explain to the East Valley Tribune readers...why the Mesa Republic's Crime Log shows...consecutive daily robberies at the same exact address. One business was burglarized on 1/2, 1/4/, 1/6 presumably by the same thief. Another business was hit on 1/1, 1/2 and 1/5. Another business was hit on 1/3 and then again on 1/4. Doesn't the Mesa Police Department do any "follow-up surveillance" anymore.
Ex-Master Mesa Police Officer Richardson, do you wonder why common folk and business people of Mesa feel a need to arm themselves with the same type of weapon (assault rifles with banana clips of 30 bullets) as the thieves that are running rampant and unchecked by the their local Law Enforcement ???
Masterrogue666 posted at 8:33 pm on Mon, Jan 14, 2013.
Dang, is it me, or does Bill always ignore me!
[wink]
Rich posted at 8:56 pm on Mon, Jan 14, 2013.
MR666
He probably just gets "Looks like spam" This board specializes in destroying any attempt at a dialectic aimed at knowledge or solutions and tries to create dissension.
az2008 posted at 1:32 am on Tue, Jan 15, 2013.
Hillstreet wrote: "we always destroyed firearms involved in crimes for obvious reasons."
Can you explain the obvious? If I buy a gun used in crime, will it be more dangerous than if I use the same money to buy a different gun?
It seems like it's obviously symbolic. Nothing more. Symbolism can be valid. (For example, the flag is a symbol.). But, you guys should be more straightforward that you're proposing a symbolic action, not something which will actually inhibit firearm misuse.
billrichardson posted at 3:48 pm on Tue, Jan 15, 2013.
666, The cost to repair could be more than the value of the gun. One an armorer touches the weapon he then own responsibility for it working right. It's a can of worms. I've seen people killed with cars, knives, guns, hands, feet and clubs. The column isn't about gun rights or gun control, its about the state imposing mandates on cities, much like the feds impose on states. I remember the resale of seized weapons working fine until the state legislature decided to get involved.
DonMey posted at 9:07 pm on Wed, Jan 16, 2013.
A bit late in the game to ask, but:
Would you support a bill which says ALL guns (let's assume an heirloom or unique/historical gun exception) involved in the death of a human being (we'll let PETA lobby for animal) deaths are destroyed? That would include a service revolver you had on on your hip for the last 5+ years, week after week at the range, and finally pulled on someone to a sad consequence. Would you support destroying that weapon based on the sympathies you evoke in the article?
billrichardson posted at 6:07 am on Thu, Jan 17, 2013.
DonMey-I support letting cities and counties do what they did successfully for decades before the state legislature decided it was their place to tell them what to do. They sold or didn't sell guns and it worked fine. Decisions were based on what the city council, county board of supervisors, police chief and sheriff thought was right. That's what I support.
Richard Mueller posted at 5:45 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.
Per the author, "... How would you like to buy a gun that killed an Arizona police officer?" That opening statement asserts that "a gun killed a police officer."
How ill-informed for a master mesa police officer. The criminal who obtained the gun illegally killed a police officer - NOT a law abiding citizen.
From that opening, the entire commentary looses any value as a serious contribution on violence in our society.
Richard Mueller posted at 5:49 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.
Again he continues, "... military grade rifles that were taken from the scene of a Gilbert mass murder that was carried out by an avowed white supremacist"
What exactly were the "military grade"rifles? The good retired master officer is well aware that if indeed these were military grade rifles they would only be offered for sale through a Class III permit which in effect keeps them out of the hands of criminals. But the author is well aware of the public's lack of education regarding what exactly a "military grade" rifle is.
Richard Mueller posted at 5:54 pm on Thu, Jan 24, 2013.
The ex-master police officer takes another stab at wrong logic and a silly attempt at fear tactics in this statement, "... police are forced to sell an unsafe weapon to a gun dealer"
The law he cites makes no provisions for forcing any law enforcement agency to sell any weapon they deem as being "unsafe"
But then again, John Q Public doesn't know this and the author trades his title for credibility with an uneducated public.
Now if my comments are deemed too harsh by the reviewers of this blog, consider the paper's allowing such scare tactics and misinformation as this "master ex-police officer" is proffering.