Several Law Enforcement Agencies Have Stopped Reselling Guns

More than a dozen law enforcement agencies across the United States have stopped reselling their used firearms or are reviewing the practice following a joint investigation by The Trace, CBS News, and Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting. The investigation, published last year, found that over 52,000 former police guns had been linked to crimes, including robberies, domestic violence, and homicides, between 2006 and 2022.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) warned law enforcement agencies in January about the risks of reselling guns, citing evidence that former police weapons are frequently used in violent crimes. In response to the investigation and the ATF’s warning, several agencies have taken action.

Four law enforcement agencies—the Cincinnati, Columbus, and Sacramento police departments, as well as the Monmouth County Sheriff’s Office in New Jersey—have confirmed they have stopped reselling guns. The Indianapolis and Minneapolis police departments had already discontinued the practice following the investigation’s findings.

Seven other agencies, including the Wisconsin State Patrol, New York State Police, Newark Police Department, and sheriff’s offices in California’s San Diego and Orange counties, the Colorado State Patrol, and the Boulder County Sheriff’s Office, have indicated they are reviewing their policies in light of the ATF’s recommendation.

Boulder County Sheriff Curtis Johnson stated that his office would consider changing its policy this year but acknowledged that budgetary constraints would play a role in the decision. Agencies typically resell guns to offset the cost of new equipment, as trade-ins provide revenue that can be used for upgrades. If departments choose to destroy guns instead, they must pay for disposal services.

Several agencies, such as the Quincy Police Department in Massachusetts, have cited financial concerns as a reason for continuing to resell firearms. Chief Mark Kennedy of Quincy Police expressed concern that resold guns could end up in criminal hands but stated that the department could not afford to change its policy.

In Kentucky, state law mandates that law enforcement agencies sell guns they no longer need, including both departmental firearms and those seized in criminal investigations. A Kentucky State Police pistol resold to a retiring officer in 2019 was later confiscated by federal agents in Buffalo, New York, during a search warrant execution related to a homicide investigation.

Researchers argue that while trade-ins may save agencies money in the short term, the long-term financial burden on taxpayers—including costs related to emergency response, crime scene cleanup, lost wages, and incarceration—far outweighs the savings. A 2010 study estimated the cost of a single homicide at over $17 million.

Former ATF special agent Scot Thomasson criticized the practice, stating that taxpayers, who fund police weapons, may unknowingly have those same firearms used against them in criminal acts. The ATF reported that between 2019 and 2023, more than 1,000 former police guns were recovered in homicides and another 2,000 were confiscated from convicted felons.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) passed a resolution in 1998 advising agencies not to resell guns, citing concerns that recirculating firearms could endanger officers and civilians. However, William Brooks, former police chief and current head of the IACP’s firearms committee, noted that the resolution expired in 2003 and may not be revived.

Brooks suggested that city governments should fully fund police weapon purchases to allow departments to dispose of old firearms. If not, he argued, agencies should have the discretion to decide whether to forgo upgrades without trade-ins.

Michael Sierra-Arévalo, an associate sociology professor at the University of Texas at Austin, acknowledged the lack of peer-reviewed research directly linking police gun trade-ins to increased violence but emphasized the moral responsibility of officials to err on the side of caution.

“The state has a responsibility to be conservative in these situations,” Sierra-Arévalo said. “I would question the moral standing of someone willing to gamble with the life of a single member of the public on the grounds that they don’t have empirical proof that a change of policy would prevent their death. We know that people are killed with these guns. That should be enough.”