Since when are WORKING guns considered "scrap metal"?
Sure, some of the guns would "work". Safe to shoot? I wouldn't want to try it with modern ammunition.
Others were so badly rusted that while they might have shot...
One break-open Western Auto shotgun was missing the forearm. Yeah, I could have sunk $30 or more into a new forearm. But then what would I have? It would have been a beat-up 20 ga worth about $50. So I sold it. If I develop an affinity for a 20-gauge break open, I'll just buy a new one. I don't see that happening any time soon.
Many of the 'better' guns (and I use that term loosely) were gutted for internal parts.
Yes, one wheelgun, a five-shot RG .22 revolver, was probably the best one turned in. Again, I'll trade $50 guns for $100 cash any day of the week.
No offense, but you are missing the point. It doesn't matter if the guns were in working order - the anti's don't know the difference. To them, a gun is a gun. There are probably a lot of collectors, gun schools, amateur gunsmith's, etc., that would love to get their hands on some of those guns. Besides that, he played into the "buy back" program - which helps their cause.
Bravo sierra on several layers.
I strongly dispute your fundamental assumption that a turn-in helps those opposed to the right of self-defense. How does a turn-in "help" the hoplophobes? Hmm?
Collectors, schools, etc.? Oh, save the drama. Why would anyone want to work on a gun that is unsafe to shoot?
Why don't some of you absolutists put your checkbooks where your mouths are and step up to the plate. You tell me how many clunkers you want to buy for $100 each and I'll tell you how many checks to bring. You can then donate them to a school or keep it all quiet so we don't "help their cause."
The response by some of the people on this forum makes me ill!
John