Discussion | 8 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy

• Former FF residentMarch 10, 2013 - 4:39 am

  Great analogy!!!!!!!!!

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• The Other SKMarch 10, 2013 - 10:03 am

  Granted, it wasn't necessarily the criminals who were turning in their guns, but I'd rather have unwanted guns destroyed than have some thug burglarize a house, help himself to a weapon, and use it to commit a crime. Guns are not in short supply in this country.

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• George Guynn, JrMarch 10, 2013 - 11:20 am

  The other SK. if the government had its way, guns would be in short supply for citizens. At least the public has a chance against bad people, including government types, with lots a guns out there. If only criminals have guns, what are your chances? Zero or less!!!

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• A Different PerspectiveMarch 10, 2013 - 1:00 pm

  If we have the right to own guns, shouldn't we also have right to dispose of them how we see fit? No one forced or coerced anyone to participate.

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• freemanMarch 10, 2013 - 1:15 pm

  ADP: Yet!

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• A Different PerspectiveMarch 10, 2013 - 1:22 pm

  If you're saying this is a step toward that, I would disagree. Even the staunchest gun control advocates do not want to take away the right to bear arms. The debate is really what arms are appropriate. I have no problem with my neighbor owning a hand gun, rifle or shotgun for protection or sport. On the other hand, I would prefer that my neighbor not be allowed to own a working bazooka.

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• Former FF residentMarch 10, 2013 - 10:31 pm

  ADP... you have been drinking too much of the Biden cool-aid that was "sweetened" by Feinstein or Pelosi. Bazooka's are a destructive device and as such have been strictly regulated for generations and are virtually impossible to get, especially in California. This also includes real "assault weapons" (as opposed to the ones you see on tv lumped into an incorrect moniker developed by politicians). These are also known as machine guns or selective fire weapons, suppressors, short barrel rifles, "sawed off" shotguns, claymore mines, cannons, and any other military armament you can think of. People that tend to argue against others having a specific item typically don't know squat about what they are trying to rid society of.

  Reply | Report abusive comment

• The Other SKMarch 10, 2013 - 2:57 pm

  Mr. Guynn, gun buyback programs are not about taking away your right to own a gun. Unwanted guns are willingly traded in for cash/gift cards, not seized by the authorities. No one's rights are being violated in the exchange. I believe in gun control AND the right to bear arms. The two are not mutually exclusive.

  Reply | Report abusive comment