Why do leftist journalists always lie about guns? Or, if we are to be charitable, why do leftist journalists write freely about topics (like guns) about which they know almost nothing?

A recent Flint, Michigan gun "buyback" gave rise to the latest round of pearl-clutching, this time due to the collected guns being broken up for parts — and, as usual, a news story about this is, let's say, less than completely accurate. (Yes, I'm aware of the massive understatement.) Let's look at a few of these inaccuracies.

When Flint, Michigan, announced in September that 68 assault weapons collected in a gun buyback would be incinerated, the city cited its policy of never reselling firearms.

“Gun violence continues to cause enormous grief and trauma,” Mayor Sheldon Neeley said. “I will not allow our city government to profit from our community’s pain by reselling weapons that can be turned against Flint residents.”

First of all, as I've said many times, there's no such thing as "gun violence." That's a cynical and dishonest deflection. Just as there can be no such thing as "fist violence" or "knife violence," there is no such thing as "gun violence." Violence is an action that requires an actor, and it is on the actor, not the tool, that criminal justice must focus on — not blaming the sword for the hand that wields it. But here's the real howler:

But Flint’s guns were not going to be melted down. Instead, they made their way to a private company that has collected millions of dollars taking firearms from police agencies, destroying a single piece of each weapon stamped with the serial number and selling the rest as nearly complete gun kits. Buyers online can easily replace what’s missing and reconstitute the weapon. 

This is just dishonest — or staggeringly ignorant. The "single piece" mentioned is the frame or receiver, legally designated by the 1968 Gun Control Act and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) as the basic firearm component, thus bearing the gun's legally required serial number. It is the part without which the rest of the gun cannot function. It is not "easily replaced," as the buyer must go through the same process as buying a complete firearm, including all of the federal background check requirements and all state/local laws that may apply.

This same story actually admits this — in the 14th paragraph, below the fold, so to speak.

Police agencies and disposal companies say they are following guidelines set by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. While the guidelines, posted on the ATF website, show illustrations of whole guns being cut into pieces with an acetylene torch, they also say that an “acceptable method” is to destroy just the receiver or frame.

In other words — obfuscation aside — the parts companies are operating completely within the boundaries of the law.

This is not a loophole. This is not a workaround. This is the law, and these part companies are obeying it. The assembly of a complete firearm from a parts kit requires obeying every single law that applies to the purchase of a complete, operational firearm. Yes, in many cases, an "80%" receiver can be modified and a gun assembled for personal use, which is also legal at the federal level; as long as all state and local laws are complied with, this, too, is perfectly legal. There are no evasions here. There is the law, and the parts companies are following it. There is an avenue to have guns completely destroyed if these municipalities wish it and are willing to pay for it, which it seems they are not.

Those of us who are involved in the Second Amendment debate are used to politicians blathering about firearms when they lack the requisite understanding of the difference between face and fundament. We're used to stupid and unconstitutional laws passed by pols who are either aware of the uselessness and unconstitutional aspects and don't care or who are just ignorant. But this case is particularly egregious as Flint, Michigan, and other officials whining about this are complaining about parts companies who are operating completely within the limits of the law.

Everything Gunbusters and related companies are doing is perfectly legal, and it should be. They present a valuable resource for shooters and collectors. Some years ago, my father's old Stevens pump gun needed a new trigger group, and I was able to obtain one from one of these companies, restoring to legal use a family heirloom built in the '40s and out of production for almost 80 years. That — not providing guns to criminals — is the purpose of these companies. 

It's past time big-city pols stop worrying about inanimate objects and start looking at the root causes of their rising crime rates — like, say, their district attorneys.