Hundreds of guns collected at buyback event Portola Valley, posted by Editor, The Almanac Online, on Feb 25, 2013 at 2:50 pm
It took less than three hours Saturday, Feb. 23, to collect 355 firearms at a three-city gun buyback event in East Palo Alto. The $52,000 for the buyback was raised by the Menlo Park nonprofit, Protect Our Children Bay Area.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, February 25, 2013, 10:26 AM
Posted by Chris Bay, a resident of the Portola Valley: Westridge neighborhood, on Feb 25, 2013 at 2:50 pm
I wonder if these gun grabbers also gave out lawn signs to all the sheep that turned in their guns for less than they were worth, reading "This is a Gun Free Home, we will not defend our families under any circumstance" Post this sign in your front yard and see how safe you are. This is a free Nation so they can turn in their guns if they want, but I won't lift a finger to protect them when they are attacked, raped or robbed. Jackie Speier and Diane Feinstein better keep their [portion deleted] hands off the Second Amendment. What part of "Shall Not Infringe" Don't they understand.
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of another community, on Feb 25, 2013 at 3:17 pm
Exactly, MV. Truly nasty & vitriolic. Ironic that as we're commenting, a story about a bald eagle which escaped & flew to Menlo has been posted. It has a permanent disability from a gunshot so likely can't survive in the wild. What symbolism as the gun control debate rages! More importantly, I hope the eagle survives.
Posted by ken, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Feb 26, 2013 at 6:39 am
Isn't it interesting the majority of guns collected aren't used in robberies or homocides? How many criminals their 'gammies' when then can fetch a better sale price on the street? While great for headlines, it does nothing to repair the 'culture' that puts hate or simple indifference in people's hearts to kill one another.
Law makers want to disarm Americans so they can shove legislation like Obamacare at the people. Let's see Diane Feinstein rebuke her permit to carry a concealed weapon. An armed society is a polite one, not a police one.
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of another community, on Feb 26, 2013 at 3:52 pm
The gun buyback trend started as an incentive for people to remove dangerous, unwanted weapons from their homes in an easy manner. Doesn't anyone remember that this has nothing to do w/the paranoid gun nuts & all to do w/child safety? After all, these buybacks started after a child was accidentally killed w/a discarded gun in their garage. Perhaps the media should remind readers of that so the paranoids can go take their meds & relax. It's not about you paranouds & your precious cold weapons. If you want them, keep them - & do YOUR part to keep them out of the hands of children & criminals. Guns don't get stolen from homes w/out them. Kids don't accidentally shoot each other if there's no gun lying around.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Feb 26, 2013 at 4:34 pm
you are right, in most cases, the buy back programs were in response to childrens' deaths due to an unsecure firearm. The problem is that now they are being sold as a way to prevent gun violence. Sorry, that dog won't hunt. The people perpetrating a great deal of the gun violence (can you say gang bangers) aren't about to turn in their guns. If the folks behind these buy backs were just honest and say what they're really about - the safety of children and others in the home - a lot of us would have no objection. I just think they should be honest. These buy backs to zip to prevent gun violence and I object to having smoke blown up skirt.
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of another community, on Feb 26, 2013 at 5:53 pm
I don't think that the reasons are worth that much argument. We get lied to all of the time by people in power - the rich, corporations (because after all, they're people), politicians. I simply expect it.
Guns kill & the fewer unsecured guns, the better. What's out of sight is out of mind but not harmless when unsecured. When people don't care to take care of their weapons, that's very dangerous & all too common. It's no excuse for paranoid gun nuts to suggest that survivors of gun violence are worse than the killing criminals. The only good thing is that they reveal their skewed values when they spout despicable words. I live in a town w/gun violence & terrible accidental shootings, so I have an informed opinion. Gun right fanatics aren't the only ones who get to express their opinions & how many of them live in EPA or admit that they're part of the problem?
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Feb 26, 2013 at 7:47 pm
if we simply accept being lied to we will continue to be lied to and more so because we accept it and don't demand honesty. I refuse to accept being lied to. If it's about home safety then that's what they need to say. And they need to back it up with facts. It should be pretty easy. If they say its about reducing gun violence then they need to back it up, because it's not, it's feel good, "we're doing something about the problem" BS.
Posted by Hmmm, a resident of another community, on Feb 26, 2013 at 7:58 pm
Gun violence at home IS the same as home safety. Injuries and deaths by gun are ALL gun violence, intentional or not. I think that the nonprofit folks didn't lie - they walked their talk. The politicians, etc. lie. I accept the lies because I know what these these type are. They're stupid if they think we all believe it.
It's hard to know how many injuries & deaths are prevented from these buybacks - no one can prove a negative. And from what I've seen/heard the last few years, the buybacks attract many gun lovers, but not gun nuts, which is a good thing. Seriously, they need to find something more important to whine about.