Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

revolver used in crime was from a Chicago gun buy back program

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    revolver used in crime was from a Chicago gun buy back program

    For some reason this story doesn’t shock me

    https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/...JVKLtgBzKCKUhM
    The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule ...Samuel Adams, "The Rights of the Colonists" page 419

    #2
    (Possibly) An interesting story, but very poor reporting in my opinion - unless I missed a few things.

    Did they say what the Cicero police department does with the buy back firearms? Do they destroy them? Do they legally sell them to the highest bidder like some other departments do? If so, this is just a story that supports police destroying guns (unfortunately). It would be pretty interesting so see how a gun that was supposed to be destroyed wound up in a police shooting -

    They also say that the DOA's family is suing and that the city is 'ready to pay' them $3.5 million.....but the author doesn't say why.


    "The Open Carry guy is my decoy."

    Comment


      #3
      More holes in that story than the LIE in Spring after a rough Winter ! Everything Dan said plus the gun grabbers WILL spin this into “all used PD guns must be destroyed for the safety of the children.” Would they ask for all surplus former municipality trucks and cars to stop being auctioned off and be totally shredded due to accidents that occur after the sale? I know out west CalFire would be fucked if they had to buy all there new aerial tankers. Where does the insanity stop...

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Dan 0351 View Post
        (Possibly) An interesting story, but very poor reporting in my opinion - unless I missed a few things.

        Did they say what the Cicero police department does with the buy back firearms? Do they destroy them? Do they legally sell them to the highest bidder like some other departments do? If so, this is just a story that supports police destroying guns (unfortunately). It would be pretty interesting so see how a gun that was supposed to be destroyed wound up in a police shooting -

        They also say that the DOA's family is suing and that the city is 'ready to pay' them $3.5 million.....but the author doesn't say why.

        It says they destroy them.

        I think the point of the article is that a cop might have put a gun aside to be planted if ever needed, and then used it in this case. I believe that's why they mention the lawsuit/pay-out.

        That seems to me to be a rather far-fetched possibility, but it is a strange situation regardless.

        If all of what I infer is correct, there should be no effect on confiscated gun sales versus destruction. It's more of a smear on police records being shoddy or that one officer's lack of integrity should be used to indicate the trustworthiness of all officers.

        Comment


          #5
          The article posed a lot of interesting questions that need be answered especially about the gun that was supposedly turned in to police at a buy-back then allegedly was the reason someone was shot. The article in no way shape of form seems to me to support gun buy-backs, it seems rather to hint at the moronic thought process that thought up gun buy backs in the first place.
          Retired and loving it.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Range Time View Post

            It says they destroy them.

            I think the point of the article is that a cop might have put a gun aside to be planted if ever needed, and then used it in this case. I believe that's why they mention the lawsuit/pay-out.

            That seems to me to be a rather far-fetched possibility, but it is a strange situation regardless.

            If all of what I infer is correct, there should be no effect on confiscated gun sales versus destruction. It's more of a smear on police records being shoddy or that one officer's lack of integrity should be used to indicate the trustworthiness of all officers.
            Missed the 'destroyed' part (first paragraph mention it), got the point of the 'planted' gun theory - I was trying to point out that the author didn't really make that connection. An IAD investigation doesn't equal a $3.5 mil payout.
            "The Open Carry guy is my decoy."

            Comment


              #7
              Does anybody actually think that a cop would be stupid enough to grab a certified buy-back gun, that everybody knows will be destroyed, to use it later as a "plant"?

              Should have an interesting story if they ever figure it out.

              Comment


                #8
                "Missed the 'destroyed' part (first paragraph mention it), got the point of the 'planted' gun theory - I was trying to point out that the author didn't really make that connection. An IAD investigation doesn't equal a $3.5 mil payout."

                OMG like 1,000,000% correct!!!!

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by bigbore44 View Post
                  Does anybody actually think that a cop would be stupid enough to grab a certified buy-back gun, that everybody knows will be destroyed, to use it later as a "plant"?

                  Should have an interesting story if they ever figure it out.
                  Yes lol. Just because you're a cop doesn't mean you're not stupid....

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by artburg View Post

                    Yes lol. Just because you're a cop doesn't mean you're not stupid....
                    I agree, but THAT stupid? Anything is possible I guess. Just gave them more credit than that. It would be so obvious.
                    Last edited by bigbore44; 11-17-2019, 04:43 PM.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Further proof you cannot trust or rely on the inefficiencies of govt. to help and protect you. Only you can do that.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        The gun was turned in 2004. I don’t see where it says what Department that was doing the buyback . The judge said it was supposed to be destroyed how does he know this we don’t even know what department and what policy was in place in 2004. Article is horrible and officer Garrity sounds batshit
                        Last edited by Shamuscull; 11-17-2019, 08:52 PM.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Dan 0351 View Post

                          Missed the 'destroyed' part (first paragraph mention it), got the point of the 'planted' gun theory - I was trying to point out that the author didn't really make that connection. An IAD investigation doesn't equal a $3.5 mil payout.
                          I thought conjecture and hatred of conservative authority figures were all the left needed to make a connection...

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Range Time View Post

                            I thought conjecture and hatred of conservative authority figures were all the left needed to make a connection...
                            Tru-dat, my mistake.
                            "The Open Carry guy is my decoy."

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by bigbore44 View Post
                              Does anybody actually think that a cop would be stupid enough to grab a certified buy-back gun, that everybody knows will be destroyed, to use it later as a "plant"?

                              Should have an interesting story if they ever figure it out.
                              While most folks I met in LE during my career were rather bright - yes, I think there are some stupid enough arse hats in law enforcement to do that. I met quite a few less than smart ones in my career and the few corrupt ones I encountered were the stupidest of all. For instance: there was an agent, I worked with, who stole some narcotics from a seizure thinking it was heroin and then mistakenly shot up some very potent cocaine winding up stone cold dead where he sat. Turns out the mule had both drugs inserted in condoms and the agent grabbed the wrong one. You would think, with all the test kits he had available, being in a narcotics smuggling investigations group, the agent would have been smart enough to test it first; then again he was stupid enough to be a junkie. A badge is not a shield that protects its wearer from being an idiot.

                              Not saying that is the case here but I would not be all that surprised.
                              Retired and loving it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X