St. Louis police to sell Tommy gun stash to buy new firearms

[Artful]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/05/31/st-louis-police-to-sell-tommy-gun-stash-to-buy-new-firearms.html

Published May 31, 2017 Fox News
They were the weapon of choice among gangsters during the Roaring 20’s and the 1930s – and now more of them can be in your hands.

The St. Louis Police Department is selling off a $1.2 million stash of firearms, including 27 Thompson submachine guns, to help fund the purchase of new Beretta pistols and AR-15 rifles for officers, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.



Christine Byers ✔ @ChristineDByers
St. Louis police sell surplus weapons, including Tommy guns, for $1.2 million http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/st-louis-police-sell-surplus-weapons-including-tommy-guns-for/article_458188dd-f018-54fd-9d11-cdd498cf8ecd.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share … via @stltoday
6:52 AM - 30 May 2017
Photo published for St. Louis police sell surplus weapons, including Tommy guns, for $1.2 million
https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/869422384092020736/Pv2b4z8b?format=jpg&name=600x314
St. Louis police sell surplus weapons, including Tommy guns, for $1.2 million
Leftover money from purchase of new handguns will be used to buy AR15 rifles for St. Louis police
stltoday.com
14 14 Retweets 7 7 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

The vintage weapons – with some dating back to 1921 – were also carried by cops and FBI agents, and they have been stored in a basement bunker at the department’s police academy ever since they were decommissioned around 60 years ago.

“The original reason to sell the weapons was to purchase new duty weapons, and we did so well on the sale, we will be able to purchase rifles as well, by our own actions without using any budget money,” Carol Shepard, the police department’s purchasing procurement manager, told the newspaper.

Shepard said the department’s current pistols are more than a decade old and are becoming difficult to find replacement parts for. But Raymond Reynolds, the president of Police Trades – a broker who is facilitating the deal – says police weapons are in high demand since they are usually well-kept and rarely fired.

The Tommy guns are being purchased by a Kentucky-based distributor for $22,000 each and will then be sold off to interested buyers if they pass a series of restrictions.

Amongst them:

needing to hold a federal license to buy such firearms, passing a background check, paying a $200 federal tax and notifying their neighborhood’s local police chief of the purchase, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reports.

Police will begin transferring the weapons pending approval by city officials of a contract with the broker.

[Jeff Michel]

I doubt that they will end up in private hands, likely dealer samples. Police were never required to go through the amnesty process with their class three items.

[Beagle333]

Man. I have ALWAYS wanted a Tommy gun.

[JBinMN]

The Tommy guns are being purchased by a Kentucky-based distributor for $22,000 each and will then be sold off to interested buyers if they pass a series of restrictions.

Always has to be a "middleman" for things like this. Just raise the price a bit more. Then to a dealer who has passed a "series of restrictions". Then the price goes up again. Then, if they do reach the folks who have the $200 Fed. permit. The price is so astronomical that it isn't worth having one, IMO.
:(

They seemed popular enough that I am surprised that someone doesn't make a replica of them(semi auto). The 1911 that fires the same round sure is popular. Maybe someone does, but I am not sure...
:???:


Anyway, thanks for posting up the article, it was interesting to read.
:)

[dragon813gt]

I doubt that they will end up in private hands, likely dealer samples. Police were never required to go through the amnesty process with their class three items.

Yep, only dealers will be able to buy them. Real shame IMO.

[imashooter2]

I doubt that they will end up in private hands, likely dealer samples. Police were never required to go through the amnesty process with their class three items.

My first thought as well. Not transferable.

[imashooter2]

Always has to be a "middleman" for things like this. Just raise the price a bit more. Then to a dealer who has passed a "series of restrictions". Then the price goes up again. Then, if they do reach the folks who have the $200 Fed. permit. The price is so astronomical that it isn't worth having one, IMO.
:(

They seemed popular enough that I am surprised that someone doesn't make a replica of them(semi auto). The 1911 that fires the same round sure is popular. Maybe someone does, but I am not sure...
:???:


Anyway, thanks for posting up the article, it was interesting to read.
:)

Auto Ordnance has been selling them forever...

http://www.auto-ordnance.com/Firearms/Thompson-T1.asp

[2wheelDuke]

Always has to be a "middleman" for things like this. Just raise the price a bit more. Then to a dealer who has passed a "series of restrictions". Then the price goes up again. Then, if they do reach the folks who have the $200 Fed. permit. The price is so astronomical that it isn't worth having one, IMO.
:(

They seemed popular enough that I am surprised that someone doesn't make a replica of them(semi auto). The 1911 that fires the same round sure is popular. Maybe someone does, but I am not sure...
:???:


Anyway, thanks for posting up the article, it was interesting to read.
:)

I think the "middleman" might be due to federal law. Police Departments can acquire firearms obviously, but the departments aren't licensed to sell firearms. A local department recently phased out their old duty guns. Officers were given the option to buy their old ones, but had to do the transfer at a local gun shop in the city, allegedly due to federal regulations. In the case of these old Tommy guns, they'll probably have to be considered dealer samples since they weren't already listed with the feds as "transferrable" machine guns.

As far as the Thompson, semi-auto versions are made. Kahr owns the rights to Auto Ordinance now. However, the NFA interferes. If you want a buttstock, you need the barrel extended to over 16" length. Or they have to leave out the buttstock for the models with the original barrel lengths to legally consider them "pistols."

http://www.auto-ordnance.com/Thompson_T1-14.asp

[jmort]

How cool is that?
Way cool
Those guns looking good

[farmerjim]

One of my cousins had 3 of them along with several other full autos. We were shooting them at my range in the back field when a sheriffs deputy drove in. On exiting the car, his first words were " I don't think you are breaking any laws, but somebody called in a complaint and I have to make a report. " There is a subdivision about 150 yards to the right side of the range. All of the hunters in the subdivision use my range to sight in their guns. The person that complained has moved.

[EMC45]

A transferable Thompson is almost triple that price.

[JBinMN]

Auto Ordnance has been selling them forever...

http://www.auto-ordnance.com/Firearms/Thompson-T1.asp


I think the "middleman" might be due to federal law. Police Departments can acquire firearms obviously, but the departments aren't licensed to sell firearms. A local department recently phased out their old duty guns. Officers were given the option to buy their old ones, but had to do the transfer at a local gun shop in the city, allegedly due to federal regulations. In the case of these old Tommy guns, they'll probably have to be considered dealer samples since they weren't already listed with the feds as "transferrable" machine guns.

As far as the Thompson, semi-auto versions are made. Kahr owns the rights to Auto Ordinance now. However, the NFA interferes. If you want a buttstock, you need the barrel extended to over 16" length. Or they have to leave out the buttstock for the models with the original barrel lengths to legally consider them "pistols."

http://www.auto-ordnance.com/Thompson_T1-14.asp



Thanks! I kind of figured there would be one, but did not know there was one for sure.
:)

The price doesn't seem that bad either considering what the ones in the "auction" went for at 22 Grand or so..

[308Jeff]

You dirty rat. You killed my brother, and now I'm gonna kill you, see? It's coitons...

[JBinMN]

A transferable Thompson is almost triple that price.

Meaning a Thompson auto is going for about 60 Grand?

Sounds like my "middleman to dealer to user/owner" theory isn't too far off then...

[Adam Helmer]

The St. Louis Police NEVER owned those Tommy Guns, rather the St. Louis taxpayers always owned those guns the police were privileged to use. Any proceeds from the sale of the arms needs to go back to the taxpayers.

Adam

[mcdaniel.mac]

Meaning a Thompson auto is going for about 60 Grand?

Sounds like my "middleman to dealer to user/owner" theory isn't too far off then...
If the guns weren't transferrable pre-86, they can never go to 'private hands' as such. They can be owned by museums or dealers and manufacturers with an SOT, which is several thousand dollars to maintain. For example, a Post-May MP5 might be $5k, but a transferrable MP5 registered receiver runs closer to $40k. A post-May or pre-may sample can not become transferrable.

[smkummer]

The only way a class three dealer is going to pay 22K each for these is if they are transferable. Asking prices on Colt Thompsons is over 40k if they are in good condition with a 1921 as the highest. If they are a Savage or Bridgeport Thompson (. WW2) about 22-25K. A M1 Thompson would be around 20k. Most likely the dealer even factored in that when 20 some of these are on the market all at once, he will put the price a smidgen under what other are asking so as to move them unless he can afford that much money tied up for a bit.

[Artful]

Most likely the dealer even factored in that when 20 some of these are on the market all at once, he will put the price a smidgen under what other are asking so as to move them unless he can afford that much money tied up for a bit.

My guess with the amount of money involved is that it's Bud's

Budsgunshop.com an Llc
Business Name :Buds Police Supply
License Name :Budsgunshopcom Llc
City :Lexington
State :KY

I and would think they could afford to sit on some for awhile.

[Hardcast416taylor]

After Korea a neighbor kid brought over what his Uncle smuggled home, it was an M-1 Thompson. We took the gun back into a wooded grove on their farm and went thru the stick clips that he had, 4 I think. We found out how that gal will climb on full auto and how fast the clip will be fired up. I later heard that he caught h*ll from his Uncle and folks for that stunt, the Thompson also disappeared.Robert

[popper]

Gotta stand on the sling which is only attached to the front. Standard GI practice in the day.

[Tracy]

Meaning a Thompson auto is going for about 60 Grand?

Sounds like my "middleman to dealer to user/owner" theory isn't too far off then...

Pretty far off, actually. These almost certainly aren't gonna sell to some "middleman" for $22K each and then be sold to collectors for $60K, because they almost certainly aren't pre-'86 registered transferrables, and therefore can never be sold to an individual. As for those who actually can legally possess a non-transferrable machine gun (police and sheriff departments and other government entities, and special dealers/manufacturers who sell to same), they can simply buy brand new full-auto Thompsons from Auto Ordnance if they still make them... and if there is a demand for them, they do. Prices on those would probably be about the same as the semi-auto version.

It's kinda' like the AR-15 story. You can buy a semi-auto Bushman (for example) for well under $1000. You can buy (assuming you pass the background check, which takes about 10 months) a pre-1986 transferrable full auto Bushmaster for $20,000+. And of course you have to pay the $200 transfer tax as well.
If you are representing a government agency and have a purchase order on agency letterhead, you can buy a brand new full-auto Bushmaster for about the same price as the semi-auto version -- that is, well under $1000. But as an individual, you cannot buy a new full-auto Bushy. Period. You can only buy full auto guns that were placed in the registry as a transferrable, prior to May 19, 1986. That is why they are so expensive; not because of any intrinsic value.

[308Jeff]

You are 100% correct on everything you said, but what makes you believe these are post-'86 rifles? The article states some of them date back as far as 1921, and decommissioned by the the department in the 60's.

I know that I read a few years ago about another city PD getting rid of their stashes of Thompsons, and they were all old rifles.

I'm not disagreeing with you, or inferring you're incorrect, just wondering why you think they're post-ban? Or are you simply stating that they aren't transferable?

[dragon813gt]

I'm not disagreeing with you, or inferring you're incorrect, just wondering why you think they're post-ban? Or are you simply stating that they aren't transferable?

Police departments did not register them before the ban. At least none that I know of. Since they most likely aren't registered they're non transferable.

[JMax]

I know of 2 1921's that were registered on form 4's by the SO and later traded to a friend for a few ARs and 870's but it is very rare for an agency yo do that. Other than that they cannot be introduced into commerce so individuals will not be able to posses them.

[JBinMN]

I appreciate all the efforts to educate me on the whys & wherefores of this deal.

Thanks very much!
:)

I guess then this becomes a "no news" thing really, if they cannot be sold, unless to a select group & will never meet the general public as a salable item.

Thanks again to the OP for the share of the news, & those who helped out with the other info , but I have now decided that this is no longer an item of interest for "me" at least, but now it is an item of, " Doggonit, some folks get all the breaks."

I don't even want to own one that much... just want to shoot one for a bit.. I'd even supply the rounds.
;)

LOL
:D

[dragon813gt]

There are ranges that rent them. I shot one when in Vegas. I can tell you they are heavy and really like to walk upwards. The point about standing on a sling can't be stressed enough. It was cool to shoot but I don't one. Now a MP5, I want to buy every variant :D

[shortfal]

A few things re the Thompsons.
I know the guy that evaluated all those guns about 4 years ago for the St Louis PD.
All but one or two ARE transferable. Many are not in real good condition. The PD is keeping the 2 best ones.
NO license is needed to possess a transferable MG so far as the feds are concerned. Other than (some) states that require some sort of state permit folks that can buy a regular pistol or rifle can posses a MG. Not counting California, New York and I think Hawaii.
Standing on a sling to control muzzle rise is ********! I don't know where such **** comes from. I shoot my M1A1 Thompson regularly. The gun weighs about 10 pounds and is quite controllable. A M1A1 does not even have a muzzle device as a 21 or 28 Thompson does.
It would be helpful to have posters that are not particularly familiar with NFA weapons not post things that they don't really know about. Folks read this stuff and the misconceptions continue on and on.
Pete 07/C2

[Artful]

Police departments did not register them before the ban. At least none that I know of. Since they most likely aren't registered they're non transferable.

All NFA items should have been registered after 1934 - the question is what kind of registration ...

Form 10 would be normal LEO but a dealer/distributor wouldn't then bother buying them from the Dept.
as that only LEO and no other dept is going to pay 22K for more for a Thompson.

If they were Form 5 that may be another matter.

ATF Form 5.
Transferors of NFA firearms to government entities, Federal, State, or local, must
file ATF Forms 5, Application for Tax Exempt Transfer and Registration of a Firearm, to transfer the
firearms to such entities.169 (Note: The applicant may wish to include details regarding the receiving
agency if the agency is obscure. Note also that there are no transfers to task forces.) Although Forms 5
are generally required to be filed and approved for transfer of firearms to U.S. agencies, firearms owned
or possessed by Federal agencies are not required to be registered. Appendix C contains a copy of the
form.

In these transactions, the transferor has no liability for the transfer tax. As previously stated, the
form must be approved by ATF before the transfer may be made. As discussed in more detail below,
Forms 5 are also used to transfer unserviceable firearms tax free, transfer firearms to FFLs for repair and
for their return, and for distribution of estate firearms to lawful heirs.

Depending upon their status before the Form 5 transfer they could be eligable for civilian transfer.

[Artful]

A few things re the Thompsons.
I know the guy that evaluated all those guns about 4 years ago for the St Louis PD.
All but one or two ARE transferable. Many are not in real good condition. The PD is keeping the 2 best ones.

NO license is needed to possess a transferable MG so far as the feds are concerned. Other than (some) states that require some sort of state permit folks that can buy a regular pistol or rifle can posses a MG. Not counting California, New York and I think Hawaii.

Standing on a sling to control muzzle rise is ********! I don't know where such **** comes from. I shoot my M1A1 Thompson regularly. The gun weighs about 10 pounds and is quite controllable. A M1A1 does not even have a muzzle device as a 21 or 28 Thompson does.

It would be helpful to have posters that are not particularly familiar with NFA weapons not post things that they don't really know about. Folks read this stuff and the misconceptions continue on and on.
Pete 07/C2

[smilie=s:

Thanks for sharing that info.

[Petrol & Powder]

OK, I'll bite, Why wouldn't those Thompsons' be transferrable?

They were made in the U.S.A. prior to 1986, lawfully owned by the St. Louis PD and are clearly NFA weapons going through a class III dealer to a potential tax stamp holder. I'm not certain they are relegated to be dealer samples. Regardless, St. Louis will have no problem selling those to NFA compliant buyers whether they be dealers or ultimately non-dealers.

And by the way, the poster that opined they are "owned" by the taxpayers isn't exactly correct. They were paid for by taxpayers but they are OWNED by the PD. If you don't believe me; go jump in a police car, HUMVEE or School Bus that you think you own because you're a taxpayer and drive off with it. Let me know how that turns out.

[Artful]

OK, I'll bite, Why wouldn't those Thompsons' be transferrable?

They were made in the U.S.A. prior to 1986, lawfully owned by the St. Louis PD and are clearly NFA weapons going through a class III dealer to a potential tax stamp holder. I'm not certain they are relegated to be dealer samples. Regardless, St. Louis will have no problem selling those to NFA compliant buyers whether they be dealers or ultimately non-dealers.

And by the way, the poster that opined they are "owned" by the taxpayers isn't exactly correct. They were paid for by taxpayers but they are OWNED by the PD. If you don't believe me; go jump in a police car, HUMVEE or School Bus that you think you own because you're a taxpayer and drive off with it. Let me know how that turns out.

If the guns were not entered into the NFA registry before 1986 (irregardless of mfg date) then they are not transferable to civilians - If they were registered on form 10 then only LEO eligible ownership is allowed. If never registered only the Fed's can own them (Military for example)

If on a Form 5 they may have been on the register as transferable that was transferred on a tax free form 5 to the Dept. but when transferred out they would revert back to civilian transferable firearms.

As a civilian you either get a form 1 (DIY) or a form 4 transfer from a dealer to individual or individual to individual.

[308Jeff]

If they were non-transferable, I don't see that they could be worth $22,000. If they were only useful to people who can possess non-transferable weapons, why not just pay for a non transferable new one?

[Petrol & Powder]

So if they're really non-transferable they have almost no value.

I'm going to go with the possibility that they are transferable.

I don't know when or from whom, the St. Louis PD acquired those machine guns but I'm guessing they've had them a long time. Full auto Thompsons were possessed by many different agencies including the U.S. military and several federal agencies. Police departments could have acquired Thompsons from those sources OR they could have simply purchased commercial Thompsons. We don't have enough information but the odds are good that those guns are in fact transferable.

[shortfal]

Yep. About 10 years go I "bought" 2 AR18's from a PD in New York State paying them in AR15's. Transferred to me (SOT) on 5's and I later sold these fully transferable rifles to individuals via form 4's. Easy now worth more than double what I got for them back then.
Many PD's have or had fully transferable MG's, and SBR's.
Pete

[Bzcraig]

When I read the OP, what bothered me is that the police department has to sell anything to purchase new handguns. That should be an expense the city picks up and included in the depts budget or is maybe the dept run so bad the city said no bueno. Makes me wonder?

[Tracy]

You are 100% correct on everything you said, but what makes you believe these are post-'86 rifles? The article states some of them date back as far as 1921, and decommissioned by the the department in the 60's.

I know that I read a few years ago about another city PD getting rid of their stashes of Thompsons, and they were all old rifles.

I'm not disagreeing with you, or inferring you're incorrect, just wondering why you think they're post-ban? Or are you simply stating that they aren't transferable?

What D813 said. I don't think they're post-'86; but I do think they're not registered transferrable. If that's the case, it doesn't matter when they were made.

[David2011]

Shepard said the department’s current pistols are more than a decade old and are becoming difficult to find replacement parts for.

This was the first thing to catch my attention. I can't help wondering what kind of 10 year old pistols they have that parts are hard to find.

I can see manufacturers and others that could purchase the Thompsons if they aren't registered jumping on them. If I had a business that manufactured full auto weapons I can see buying one for the company's collection. The owner has access to that collection.

David

[Petrol & Powder]

When I read the OP, what bothered me is that the police department has to sell anything to purchase new handguns. That should be an expense the city picks up and included in the depts budget or is maybe the dept run so bad the city said no bueno. Makes me wonder?

I think you may be jumping to the conclusion that the PD has to sell those items in their inventory. It doesn't appear that they are being forced to sell those items out of necessity but rather they are electing to sell those valuable seldom used items. The action frees up money in their budget for other uses.
It appears they are taking a valuable but un-needed asset and converting it to something useful.

[Shiloh]

I doubt that they will end up in private hands, likely dealer samples. Police were never required to go through the amnesty process with their class three items.

At auction, they will go to people with $$$$.

Shiloh

[308Jeff]

What D813 said. I don't think they're post-'86; but I do think they're not registered transferrable. If that's the case, it doesn't matter when they were made.

Agree and understand. I just don't think they'd be able to sell them for 22 grand if they're not going to be transferrable. My bet is they are.

[woodbutcher]

:bigsmyl2: My home town PD and SO each has two each of Thompsons and one each of BAR`s.All are very well maintained.
They were all registered when that requirement came up. Would love to have the bucks to purchase one of them if they ever came up for sale.They sure were fun to shoot if the guys were at the range when I was.Saw a program on the AHC channel yesterday evening about the battle for Hue City.One of the Marines was toting a Thompson.
Good luck.Have fun.Be safe.
Leo

[Drydock]

The USN still had Thompsons in inventory in the late 80s, and I got to qualify with one. You support it completely different from the usual small arm, with the weight being taken by the trigger hand on the pistol grip, elbow tucked in, the forehand pulling DOWN on the foregrip, seating the oddly shaped butt upward, the lower point almost in your armpit. Sounds odd, but once you figure it out it becomes very controllable. No problem holding a full stick center mass. The sling was useful for carrying it around . . .

[rondog]

I'm just glad I got to rent and shoot one once! It was fun, but convinced me I didn't want to feed one on a regular basis.

[No Blue]

The pistols they can't get parts for are Berretta 92D, DAO. Dealer is paying $221 each, which I thought was pretty high, since DAO guns are not the most popular option.

They're gonna get more Berrettas with the money....

[Artful]

They're gonna get more Berettas with the money....

:shock::groner::holysheep
Same M9 supply chain the military has and they can't get parts
- someone doesn't know their job.

[milsurpcollector1970]

The PD has to sell them in order to buy new pistols, because the city council says there's nothing wrong with the pistols they have now, and of course the concil is about as antigun as you can get. SLMPD doesnt like the dao beretta because they are all beat to heck. They work fine. As usual there are going to get some hands in the cookie jar, They have enough money from selling the Thompsons to buy new pistols and AR's for every member of the department but they are only planning on buying them for supervisors.
Honestly as bad as cops shoot maybe they shouldn't have any AR's

[No Blue]

Best friend has been buying 3rd generation S&W police trade ins; also a 40 year old Beretta 92 ex-police out of Italy. Other than some holster wear, they all work. The cops rarely shoot their guns on patrol, it's mainly qualifying and some practice use.

He's looking at a 4006 TSW out of the CHP stash....$385.

Sounds like the cops in SL just don't want a DAO pistol, but since they are really hard to accidentally fire with that long trigger pull, it's why they got them...

[colchester]

Heres one for sale goes off in a day or so
https://auctions.thegunrunner.com/lots/view/1-CI6A0/colt-model-1921-thompson-submachine-gun-45-cal-full-auto-10-mags-hard-case

[Kawgomoo]

They are transferable, Frank bought every last one of them.

[Kawgomoo]

There are several for sale on Sturm. If you are serious about MG shopping right now is a GREAT time to buy. Prices are down at the moment.

[knifemaker]

Beretta 92 and 94 pistols are not the best guns for everyone on a law enforcement department. Large grip size makes for problems with officers that have small hands. The double action trigger pull is between 12-14 pounds on new guns. Not very conducive for good accuracy shooting.
My department went to the Beretta 94 around the mid 90's and I saw officers showing a decrease in their shooting scores over the gun they carried prior to switching to the Berretta 94. Not only was I a firearms instructor for my department, I was also sent to the Beretta armors school to preform maintenance on the department's Berettas.
One of the tricks I learned there was the way to reduce the double action trigger pull from 12 pounds to 8 pounds and the single action trigger pull from 8-9 pounds to around 5-6 pounds was to replace the Beretta hammer spring with a standard 16 pound Colt 1911 hammer spring. This really helped the officers with small hands and even the more experienced shooters in the dept. There was no problems with light primer hits that occurred to my knowledge while I was at the dept. after many thousands of rounds fired in qualification or on duty.
The sheriff's office, after many complaints over the Beretta, mostly grip size and accuracy, finally went back allowing officers to carry other approved firearms at their own expense or they could select the department issued Beretta. A good majority selected other makes of firearms at their own Expense. I went back to carrying my Colt National Match 1911 that was far more accurate then my issued Beretta 94. My department tested the Beretta 94 and Sig Saur P220 45 acp for adoption and all the firearm instructors wanted the Sig Saur, but the Sheriff chose the Berretta due to cheaper cost. Big mistake in my personal opinion that did not count with the Sheriff.

[Plate plinker]

Thompson guns are controllable unless your a 80 pound weakling. AS stated above they are not lightweight.

[shortfal]

Selling those guns to get a few new Berettas? Yeah right !!
*******es running the city have plenty of $$$ to try and move the Confederate monument but sell the collectable guns cause they need money? Uh, Huh!
Betcha that money goes into some sort of slush fund .
Pete

[Petrol & Powder]

I'm not sure why people keep portraying this sale as something that St. Louis PD HAD to do.

It appears the St. Louis PD chose, elected or decided to sell items in their inventory. The items had tremendous value in the collectors market and would go to a tightly controlled group of responsible buyers. It was a lucrative move to convert an unused, un-needed but highly valuable item to funds that can be used for other needs. Taxpayers should applaud the decision because it doesn't cost them a thing. Clearly the St. Louis PD has little need for Thompson Submachine guns and likely never deploys those weapons.

Liberals freak out when they see officers with M4's, AR-15's and 870 shotguns; can you imagine what they would do if the press showed a picture of an officer holding a Tommy Gun?
Furthermore, the St. Louis PD isn't in the business of collecting guns and they are not a museum. If they want to keep one for display, that's fine but keeping several permanently locked up in an armory isn't useful.

I think it was a good decision to sell them. Collectors will buy them, display them, shoot them and the PD will have money in their budget that didn't come from taxes.
It's a win - win.

[Plate plinker]

^^^^^and they didn't get scrapped by some dogooder leftist.

[Petrol & Powder]

YEP !! I think most of us would cry if someone took a cutting torch to those guns.

[Multigunner]

"I always thought that if they were made for the us government and THEN transferred to police departments, they ahd to be returned to the federal gov as the federal gov did not actually give up ownership.. "

Depends on the Model. During WW2 the US military was very short on automatic weapons for quite awhile so they asked Law Enforcement to contribute the BARs and such they had in their arsenals to the cause.

IIRC, and I may be wrong, the 1921 models were all civilian and LEO purchased weapons aside from a few bought by the US Post Office to guard mail shipments, often containing large amounts of cash and bearer bonds, during the depression.

The British only got their Thompsons because the French had ordered these just before the Germans occupied France, the British stepped in and bought these guns then as many as they could find elsewhere.

Some of the Rarest Thompsons would be the BSA licensed copy redesigned to move the trigger group to the rear of the receiver and using an SMLE style butt stock with no pistol grip. You aren't likely to see these on Ebay.