LA Times: Brazil Gun Buyback Exceeds Hopes

Status
Not open for further replies.

papercut

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
199
Location
Cobb County, Georgia
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-guns25oct25,1,5220222.story

Brazil Gun Buyback Exceeds Hopes
Officials have collected nearly 130,000 firearms in a program to make the violent country safer. Up to 20 million may still be out there.
By Henry Chu
Times Staff Writer

October 25, 2004

RIO DE JANEIRO — Every time he hit the road as a traveling salesman, Francisco Pereira packed two things: clothes and heat.

It was just a simple handgun, small and cheap. "He was afraid something would happen," said his wife, Palmyra Goncalves Pereira. "He felt safer with it."

Thankfully, her husband retired without having to fire a shot. But now Palmyra, 72, sees her grandchildren staring at the gun in fascination, and she worries they might come to harm.

She and her husband are eager to get rid of the firearm. In exchange, they will receive not only peace of mind but a modest payment under a buyback program in effect since July, part of an ambitious gun-control law in one of South America's most violent countries.

Already, the buyback has exceeded official expectations, with more weapons turned in halfway through the six-month program than had been forecast for its entire duration. Officials have collected nearly 130,000 guns, and there is talk of extending the program's deadline.

Complaints, too, have arisen. Gun-control advocates say federal police, who are in charge of administering the buyback, have resisted the help of civic organizations and scorned other measures to make the program even more effective.

Despite the law's early success, the pulse of violence in Brazil persists. The number of firearms handed over is minuscule compared with the total believed to be in circulation, and daily headlines here in Rio throb with accounts of fatal street robberies, shootouts between criminals and police and wanton bloodletting among feuding drug gangs that have no intention of surrendering their stockpiles.

"The government says there are 8 million to 20 million guns in the country. The 130,000 is a drop in the ocean," said Leonardo Arruda, spokesman for the National Assn. of Gun Owners and Vendors, which opposes the new law. "Violence will continue to increase."

Gun deaths have already reached staggering levels in Brazil. Someone is killed by a bullet every 12 minutes, adding up to more than 40,000 such deaths a year — many more than occur in the U.S., which has 100 million more people.

The new legislation imposes strict criteria on gun ownership, establishes a unified national gun registry, forbids most ordinary citizens to carry firearms in public and calls for a referendum a year from now on whether to ban gun sales entirely, a measure that would probably pass by a large majority if the vote were held today.

What the law does not do, critics note, is disarm criminals.

Arruda of the gun association said that those who have turned in their guns under the buyback program have tended to be older residents rather than the young males who make up the vast majority of gun users and victims.

The experience of Viva Rio, an influential nonprofit group and one of the primary backers of the law, bears out that point. Most of the firearms collected by the organization have been brought in by people over 50, said Antonio Rangel Bandeira, the head of Viva Rio's disarmament project.

"We have a problem here," Bandeira said. "We are not touching the youth."

A mass-media ad campaign hopes to address that crucial population, including humorous TV spots made by famous actresses questioning the virility of men who feel the need to pack a gun.

For Bandeira, a larger problem is reluctance by federal police to allow more civic groups to get involved in collecting weapons. The federal police, who are chronically understaffed, say that ordinary citizens are not equipped to handle the guns safely. But many Brazilians have little faith in their law enforcement agencies, some of which have been known to divert arms shipments to drug dealers for cash.

"Viva Rio, in two months, collected 2,500 guns by itself. Eighty percent of the people who came here said, 'If Viva Rio weren't receiving the guns, we wouldn't have gone to the police station,' " Bandeira said. "They don't trust the police. Most of the guns — 70% of the guns here — were not registered. They are illegal. People in this situation are afraid to go to the police, even with the amnesty.

"The second reason is that they don't trust that [the police] will destroy the guns," Bandeira said. "They think they'll sell the guns on the black market."

Viva Rio makes a point of disabling each weapon in the presence of the person who brought it in. That appeals to Daniel Pessanha, a bank teller who intends to hand over a .22-caliber pistol he acquired years ago in a swap for his watch.

Pessanha, 47, said he felt more comfortable going to Viva Rio, whose friendlier approach was not so nerve-racking as approaching the police.

Methinks that this story is an example of "spin early, spin often." They're claiming success before finding out if the buyback actually reduces crime. :fire:
 
If ever I have heard an argument in FAVOR of arming myself, not being able to trust the police is it!
I have to wonder what line of BS Viva Rio fed these people to evoke such irrational behavior.
 
dont LOL....

you have to read the LA Times and then guess what they are telling you...
a gun ban in LA....yes...what a novel concept for LA....its coming...a few more "gang related" top stories like last week, a 14 year old shot 19 times while begging for his life. The city council wants a ban. Being that LA is run by special interests is just a natural step for them. It will spread like wildfire so to speak.

remember this is a city that has banned....believe it or not........

silly string:what:

wolf
 
the problem is that you are not touching the CRIMINALS.

Gun laws that punish the perpetrators of gun crimes are the only ones that have any hope of positive effect.

Laws aimed at protecting everyone from what some people might do are useless and almost totally counterproductive.

If you are going to ban guns, collect and destroy them, then you might as well ban everything else while you’re at it.

If that boy in LA had not been shot because there were no guns to fire the bullets, you can bet his killers would have used rocks.

Does anyone know what this international craze to do away with firearms stems from?

Out.
 
I think it stems from the UN.They are pushing world wide total ban on private ownership of firearms.
Want to bet the police there are buying them for $10.00 and reselling them to crimanals for $20.00?
Bob
 
I'm with tag...

and i don't see why such a thing is not even thought of by people. I'll never understand why people think they can:

a: get rid of all guns - you can't, you can only take them away from people who want to be "good citizens" and "follow the law" - you know - like they were doing BEFORE you banned guns.

b: stop criminals who don't care about laws to begin with - i'm sure killing someone prolly isn't legal in Brazil - is it? Yet they did it? What does it matter what they did it WITH?

c: i'm all for stiffer penalties on GUN crimes if you feel that will stop crimes in general - what are the stats on that? Last i heard - tougher prosecution against people who use guns lowers the crime rate in general. THAT is a good argument if its true.

Its obvious that brazils "law" was sucessful - in collecting 160k guns. (especially if they only figured they'd get 80k total) What it does NOT do and no law like it CAN do is stop crime - I don't understand why that is ... such a hard point to make.

J/Tharg!
 
I think it stems from the UN.They are pushing world wide total ban on private ownership of firearms.

It alwase amazes me that the U.N., who must have some smart people somewhere in their ranks, push this line of thinking when it is so obviously flawed.

Maybe they (the U.N. policy makers) do have an alternative agenda, other than everyones 'safety'. Or maybe they just don't think about these things...

:scrutiny:
 
...the U.N., who must have some smart people somewhere in their ranks, push this line of thinking when it is so obviously flawed.

People who seek to deprive commoners of the right to defend our lives may be smart, stupid, or somewhere in between; intelligence, however, is irrelevant. They're evil. Evil and intelligence are completely unrelated.
 
the problem is that you are not touching the CRIMINALS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gun laws that punish the perpetrators of gun crimes are the only ones that have any hope of positive effect.

Laws aimed at protecting everyone from what some people might do are useless and almost totally counterproductive.

I've been through this discussion a few times. People don't seem to understand that laws are *supposed* to be narrowly targeted toward those who are apt to break the law, not toward those who are not. They think that if we make everything illegal, then somehow, magically, people won't--or won't be able to--break laws. They just don't seem to understand that in a free society, you let people do what they want UNTIL it hurts someone else. THEN you punish them. The hope being that the vast majority of people will mind their manners.

"You mean we have to wait until someone commits a crime before we punish them?"

Sheesh.
 
Instead of paying to turn in a gun to fight crime, if they pay them for turning in a criminal they would probably clean up crime faster.
 
the pulse of violence in Brazil persists. The number of firearms handed over is minuscule compared with the total believed to be in circulation, and daily headlines here in Rio throb with accounts of fatal street robberies, shootouts between criminals and police and wanton bloodletting among feuding drug gangs that have no intention of surrendering their stockpiles.

Thank God that they are at least getting guns out of the hands of the law abiding citizens.
 
"No, the problem is that you are not touching the CRIMINALS."

I don't know, just this past year my friend was on a bus in Brazil that was hijacked. Only two of the four hijackers had guns; the others had knives. That means the program must work, right?
 
and daily headlines here in Rio throb with accounts of fatal street robberies, shootouts between criminals and police and wanton bloodletting among feuding drug gangs that have no intention of surrendering their stockpiles.
Okay, gotcha, lots of violence and robberies.
Someone is killed by a bullet every 12 minutes, adding up to more than 40,000 such deaths a year — many more than occur in the U.S., which has 100 million more people.
Check, lots of murders in brazil.... not a very safe place I'd imagine.
A mass-media ad campaign hopes to address that crucial population,
including humorous TV spots made by famous actresses questioning the virility of men who feel the need to pack a gun.
Despite all the stuff above...you don't need to carry a gun. If you do, you probably have a small unit... Is that the kind of crazy they are selling in brazil?

:rolleyes:

thats a dumb article. And dare I say, every brazillian that votes yes on the referen<dumb> is.... dumb.

atek3
 
An armed society...

is a polite society. (I think that's from Al Capone!)

I disagree that it's the UN. I think it is generalized liberal wishful thinking. "If we want something to be so, we pass a law, and it is so." or some such.

Robert A Heinlein had it right: Read Starship Troopers the book, not the movie--jolly good read, BTW, but the punishment for murder is hanging. And they whip thieves. And paddle kids. AND ALMOST EVERYBODY IS LAW-ABIDING AND HAPPY!!!!!

Excellent philosophical discussion of the nature and use of punishment--and who should punish, and when, and why. Also deals w/the natural relationship of freedom and responsibility, two things that the liberals seem to have totally disconected in their brains.
 
Smokey Joe remarked:
I disagree that it's the UN. I think it is generalized liberal wishful thinking. "If we want something to be so, we pass a law, and it is so." or some such.
Er...this ignores the fact that many in the UN are socialist bastards.

And in reference to liberals....I agree, with the addendum that they also want to jail people who scare them (i.e., people who are willing to do things for themselves) because it demonstrates too much individual thinking.

I could probably make some sort of deep, insightful remark from that, but it's late and I'm really really tired. So someone else, go ahead.
 
A niggling point

Papercut, not saying I disagree with you (I think we're having a heated agreement,) but could you please explain the difference between a socialist and a liberal?

Is it a difference of degree, or are they different kinds of thinking altogether?
 
Methinks that this story is an example of "spin early, spin often." They're claiming success before finding out if the buyback actually reduces crime.

You just pointed out the major shift in thinking that these people are tying to put forth. The point of "buy backs" isnt to reduce crime any more. Its to get guns out of the hands of the people, period. Clearly even the media is starting to accept this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top