Comment: What exactly is the problem?

(See in situ)

What exactly is the problem?

Let me preface this by saying that I am staunch believer of the 2nd amendment, and in no way am supporting coerced disarmament of any American.

When I first read this, I too was a little upset that Amazon was participating in this program, and I considered sending a letter telling them as much.

But let's think about what is actually happening here: a place is being set-up for a couple hours where anyone can voluntarily sell/barter their guns with relative certainty that they will be destroyed.

A) No one has been forced to turn in a weapon, as far as I can tell this was entirely voluntary
B) I would imagine most of these weapons were probably collecting dust in a closet somewhere or the owner had very little use for them
C) After the recent (alleged) events in CT, perhaps some people realized how easy it would be for someone to get a hold of their weapon to be used for a crime. Granted, there are very good ways to prevent access, but not everyone has a gun locker, and if they weren't using the weapon anyway, I would not expect them to purchase one. Most gun owners would consider this a responsible action. (EDIT: By "this" I mean, selling a weapon that cannot be reasonably secured)
D) This would probably seem like a safer alternative to some than selling at a gun/pawn shop, due to concerns of being re-purchased for criminal activity. (Not necessarily agreeing with this, but I know several people who think this way.)

I welcome comments/ criticisms regarding what I said. I may not be seeing the whole picture here, as the article was brief. So if you disagree, maybe you can shed some new light on the situation and change my mind