Kentucky flips the script on gun buyback programs & Heinlein views in Action

26 Nov
Kentucky flips the script on gun buyback programs & Heinlein views in Action

As you may recall, I have utter disdain for gun buyback programs.  With that being said I was greatly amused that the State of Kentucky has done a one-eighty on the idea and have begun a sell back program.

The program has been in place for 15 years now and as you can imagine, the gun control zealots are still bemoaning the “inevitability” of blood running in the streets.  Even after a decade and a half of positive results, some are still criticizing the program such as Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney Rob Sanders.

“In my experience, the guns that end up there are dangerous weapons, poorly made, often damaged or really don’t have value unless you’re looking for an inexpensive firearm.  And if you’re looking for a cheap gun, you’re usually up to no good.”

Apparently Mr. Sanders doesn’t believe that poor people have a right to protect themselves and their family against crime.  Or maybe he is speaking from a position of bigoted elitism stating that all poor people are criminals.

Fortunately, when this bill was proposed and passed in 1998,  then State Rep. Bob Damron, D-Nicholasville, didn’t let baseless and bigoted claims prevent him from moving forward with this gun sell back program.  He argued that in his rural district the police told him that they were forced to destroy firearms that were better than they were being issued.  Damron’s bill allowed the police to keep some weapons for departmental use while sending the bulk of them to the Kentucky State Police for auction.

Not surprisingly due to the political nature of the position, a number of police chiefs, nearly unanimously in Northern Kentucky opposed the measure, going so far as circumventing the law and stockpiling these weapons to avoid following the law.  In 2000 though the Kentucky Assembly amended the law requiring that the weapons be turned over for auction within 90 days.

Now though, after $7 million worth of bullet proof vests and other police needs have been funded directly by this program, the police are among its biggest supporters. Though the support isn’t universal, and you will always have the gun control zealots try to undermine the rights of the citizenry with outlandish claims and sensationalism, it seems that Kentucky is on the right path and that the gun sell back program will continue on its successful path.


An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. -Robert Heinlein 

I’m a fan of Heinlein.  If you are uninitiated with his writing, you may be familiar with the movie Starship Troopers which was loosely based on his novel of the same name.  Heinlein was a science fiction writer who used the otherworldly landscapes to promote a libertarian philosophy.  As the above quote can attest to, Heinlein believed you are responsible for your own actions and when those actions have consequences you will act with greater care.

Why do I bring up Heinlein?  Because I detest Black Friday.  The day after Thanksgiving when people act like animals in order to get a discount on some materialistic good.  Every year you hear stories of the worst of people coming through on Black Friday, people being trampled why others do nothing to help, punches thrown over this bauble or that.

Imagine my surprise and delight when I heard about the following tale from a Sears store in San Antonio.  Being Black Friday, a long line existed heading into the store as people decide that the hours upon hours they wait in line are worth wasting in order to save a couple of bucks.  Of course, some people don’t like waiting, some people think that they can do whatever they want because everyone else are sheep and will be cowed by a dominant personality.

That is what one line cutting rude and violent man thought at least.  When the doors opened he sprinted in front of the line pushing and shoving his way to get in front of everyone.  As you can imagine some people didn’t care for his attitude or his line cutting ways and told him to go back to the end of the line.  The line cutters response was to start punching people in the face.

I can only imagine that he was bigger than the other men and women in the line so he felt confident that he would just muscle his way past those weaker than him.  What he didn’t expect, was when one man who he punched in the face responded by pulling a handgun out and pointed it at him.

Like cowards always do, the line cutting assaulter ran away and shopping continued normally.  The armed citizen will not face any charges as he had a CCW and acted right and proper in his response to the assault.

Will Mr. Face Punching Scumbag start throwing punches next time to get ahead in line?  Something tells me, probably not.  I think he got a lesson his parents neglected to give him years ago…actions have consequences.

But in an unarmed society, where the big man rules without challenge, where gangs can use muscle to oppress the weak, there are no consequences for the strong, only fallout for the weak.

 I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. -Robert Heinlein


Posted by on November 26, 2012 in Uncategorized


27 responses to “Kentucky flips the script on gun buyback programs & Heinlein views in Action

  1. Hamblin Art

    November 26, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    Citizen of the Galaxy, Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Starship Troopers <– Core lessons is civilized behavior.

    • Tony Oliva

      November 26, 2012 at 12:40 pm

      I’m a personal fan of Heinlein’s character Lazarus Long. Lot of good knowledge to be gleamed from him.

      Get a shot off fast. This upsets him long enough to let you make your second shot perfect. -LL

      When the need arises–and it does–you must be able too shoot your own dog. Don’t farm it out–that doesn’t make it nicer, it makes it worse. -LL

      You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don’t ever count on having both at once. -LL

      • nunya bidness

        November 27, 2012 at 3:22 pm

        You do realize that Lazarus Long is quite literally a Motherf&()*&er?

        (Administer comment: I was referencing more of the Notebooks of Lazarus Long than Time Enough for Love)

  2. Nonie Cornelison

    November 26, 2012 at 9:54 pm Nonie Cornelison


  3. michigansilverback

    November 27, 2012 at 11:01 am

    Heinlein had it exactly backwards. It is not that an armed society is a polite society; a polite society is polite because each fears that the other has a weapon ready to hand. Detroit is an extraordinarily polite place: its race hate (in both directions!) makes it so. As in the old South: the land of Cotton was the land of Chivalry because each slaveowner slept in fear of his own slaves.

    I’m a lifetime fan of RAH (for entertainment purposes). But he’s far more useful in determining why he is wrong than he is a guide to what is right.

    • FredB

      November 27, 2012 at 3:10 pm

      You’ve got it wrong. Do be careful about testing your ideas in the real world.

    • Sigivald

      November 27, 2012 at 3:22 pm

      It is not that an armed society is a polite society; a polite society is polite because each fears that the other has a weapon ready to hand.

      … so thus, it’s polite because it’s assumed to be armed, exactly as Heinlein said, and for the same reason he said: “Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”?

      And yet you claim this proves him wrong?

      (Thought experiment: Would that “polite society” of yours, where it’s “because each fears the other has a weapon” be polite if it was known to be disarmed?

      If so, then you don’t need the clause about fear and your thesis becomes “polite societies are polite because” – a tautology or an assertion.

      If not, we’re back to Heinlein’s case, where it’s polite because it’s armed, precisely because one doesn’t wish to offend an armed stranger.)

    • BunnySlippers

      November 27, 2012 at 3:29 pm

      Noise. You’ve learned the lessons backwards–witness your post that makes no sense–its disjointed, just a series of nonsequiturs apropos of….nothing.

    • Jim T

      November 27, 2012 at 3:51 pm

      “a polite society is polite because each fears that the other has a weapon ready to hand”

      Umm… That’s exactly what Heinlein was saying.

      I have no knowledge of Detroit (except that I seem to recall a clip of an astoundingly impolite city council meeting).

      You are also wrong with regard to the Antebellum South. The slave owners were polite and ‘chivalrous’ to EACH OTHER. This was due to the prevalence of dueling. While some of them extended this politeness to others (even including blacks), many did not. For example, the assault of Preston Brooks on Charles Sumner; innumerable whippings of their slaves, etc. If they were only polite due to fear of their own slaves, they would have all been polite to their slaves as well.

    • Jack Amok

      November 27, 2012 at 7:19 pm

      Um, that’s exactly what Heinlein was saying. He didn’t have it backwards, you just didn’t understand him.

    • JeffC

      November 27, 2012 at 8:46 pm

      really, you are going to claim Detroit is polite ? wow … must be a liberal …

    • DocEpador

      November 28, 2012 at 5:58 am

      Yeah, the thugs who break into occupied houses are real polite, all right. What Detroit do you live in?

  4. wjr

    November 27, 2012 at 4:34 pm

    Knowing Detroit quite well I can tell you that in the city itself is is anything but polite. The ‘burbs north of 8 mile and from Dearborn to the west approach genteel. Oakland county, particularly, is full of nice folks, on the whole, but the rot is moving north.

    The sad thing about Detroit is that it has gone from bad to chaos in the last thirty years. It is a thug society purely and simply where even a gun may not protect you from the roving gangs of yutes.

  5. Andrew

    November 27, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    In 1984, I went to a sheriffs auction in Williston, ND and bought a S&W Model 59, still have it. I really believe in programs where law enforcement takes the guns from the idiots and sells them to the responsible.

  6. johngalt

    November 27, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    Reblogged this on YouViewed/Editorial.

  7. MamaLiberty

    November 28, 2012 at 5:16 am

    “The armed citizen will not face any charges as he had a CCW and acted right and proper in his response to the assault.”

    Ah yes, the holy “CCW” makes all the difference. If that poor schmuck had been just another joe with no “permit,” I guess it would have been just fine for the line jumper to beat the crap out of him and anyone else not so privileged as to be “permitted” to defend themselves.

    All you folks who love the 2nd Amendment… would you kindly point out to me where it says the government MAY “infringe” on those without permission slips.

    • Dan

      November 29, 2012 at 5:35 am

      To MamaLiberty, you are right. But, we have to ride the horse we are given at this time. It wasn’t too very long ago, where that young man would have been forced to allow this behaviour. We might not ever get constitutional carry, but we are moving forward.

      • MamaLiberty

        November 29, 2012 at 5:58 am

        My problem isn’t with the necessity of dealing with the reality of the situation, but with the abject worship of the whole “permit” thing as the justification for self defense, rather than the serious roadblock and BS it truly is. We can’t stop the liberal press from spouting this nonsense, but we can avoid it ourselves and work to help people see that their right to self defense does not come from any government “permission.”

        I do sincerely believe that anyone who truly cares about self defense will vote with their feet and find a place to live where they are not in danger from both criminals and the “law” without that false “permission.” I did…

      • msalzbrenner

        November 29, 2012 at 8:56 am

        I’m going to have to agree with MamaLiberty on this one. The Constitution plainly states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. One it declares it a RIGHT, not a privileged that can be granted or taken away. Two it declares it is a RIGHT of the PEOPLE to bear arms, not the well regulated militia. Three it declares that this right is NOT TO BE INFRINGED. As far as I’m concerned that means that ANY CITIZEN of the this country has the right, and the law is not to infringe on that right.

  8. Amy

    November 28, 2012 at 5:53 am

    “In an unarmed society, where the big man rules without challenge, where gangs can use muscle to oppress the weak, there are no consequences for the strong, only fallout for the weak.”

    That’s a great quote in itself. I think I will borrow that. With credit to you, of course. 🙂

    • Tony Oliva

      November 29, 2012 at 9:06 am

      Thanks Amy. Its nice to hear that after I prattle on for so long I occasionally spit out a pearl of note that someone finds interesting 🙂

  9. jim caplinger

    December 13, 2012 at 10:51 am

    Armed Citizens are what kept many of us from speaking japanese as a primary language. During ww11. Japan had the capability to invade the west coast at the start of the war ,but due to the armed citizens ToJo was afraid to invade so bombed Pearl
    harbor instead.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: