by Joseph P. Tartaro

The futility of placing one’s hopes in wishful thinking
are summarized in the old saying, “If wishes were horses,
beggars would ride.”

The wisdom of that expression is centuries old. So
old, in fact, that few people, regardless of wealth or
status, rely on horses for transportation anymore. Yet
politicians, media pundits and other supposedly educated
adults still believe that wishing for something will make it
happen.

Nowhere is the absurdity of attempting to achieve
public policy objectives through wishful thinking more
apparent than in the gun buyback programs which are sweeping
the country. The rationale for these buybacks is that by
removing some firearms from private possession, the general
public will be safer.

This concept is flawed for several reasons.

First, it assumes erroneously that if there were no
guns, there would be no crime. As an offshoot of this rea-
soning, it is assumed that crimes or accidents will be
reduced in proportion to the number of guns removed from
private possession. Thus, proponents of the buybacks be-
lieve that “if only one gun that is removed from circula-
tion, prevents a crime or accident, the program is worth
it.”

So far, thousands of guns have been removed from pri-
vate possession by buybacks and amnesty programs in cities
and states across the country, but there is no evidence that
crimes or accidents have been reduced in any measurable
amount as a result.

Second, it assumes that anyone who want to own a gun
will be discouraged from doing so by an offer of money, or
goods, or other incentives. Quite the contrary has been the
experience in every community which has conducted a buyback
program: the people who turn in guns are the ones who don’t
know anything about them, are afraid of them, and have no
use or desire for them. No one who values a firearm for
legal or illegal purposes turns in a gun in any program,
unless there is another reason.

The list of other reasons is rather long.

People have surrendered guns that are useless for a
cash exchange, thus making a profit. In some cases, this
“selling up” can be quite useful, particularly to dealers
or collectors who have a lot of junk to get rid of. Indeed,
in many cases, one could go out and buy a number of guns
that are worth much less than the reward, and even realize a
one-hundred percent mark-up.

Others have turned in broken or worthless guns for cash
to buy other guns for criminal purposes. We reported an
incident in Gun Week in which some youths in Camden, NJ,
turned in a broken shotgun for $50 which they used to buy a
handgun from someone who was being encouraged to get rid of
it, only to use the handgun in a robbery-murder. In this
incident, the wishful thinking of the gun buyback program
had the opposite effect of its purpose. A gun which could
not even be used in a crime was removed from the hands of a
criminal only to be replaced with one which cost a life.

From Ohio comes news of a different failing of the gun
buyback programs. Most of them include an amnesty; no
questions are asked, or names taken from the people surren-
dering the firearm. Thus, a criminal who had just committed
a crime with a gun, turned it in for a reward, and also got
rid of evidence of the crime.

In Brooklyn, a man who had stolen guns in New Jersey,
turned them in a few at a time to safely “fence” his loot to
the authorities. The practice was only discovered after
some 20 guns had thus been turned in by the same person.
But the amnesty and buyback program proved to be rewarding
crime.

In most cases, however, guns which have been stolen and
turned into a buyback/amnesty program are never traced.
Thus, those who would like their stolen guns back and who
would like the criminals prosecuted for stealing them are
denied both the return of the guns and the satisfaction of
seeing the thieves prosecuted.

Still another failing of the buyback systems is that
they cheat people, often widows and widowers on limited
incomes, of the true value of their property. There have
been countless instances where promoters of the buybacks
have implied that the guns peopledon’t want are worthless
and the few dollars paid in cash or goods are a worthwhile
exchange when in fact the guns might be worth thousands.
Seldom do the promoters of such buyback programs suggest
that the owners of unwanted firearms have them appraised by
a dealer first, so that they can not only get rid of someth-
ing they don’t want, but can also realize a useful cash
benefit.

Ultimate Buyback

There is only one way in which gun buybacks could be
expected to reduce the likelihood of their use to commit
crimes or inflict injury through accidents. That is to
apply the same strategy that would be needed to eliminate
criminal use and accident injuries from motor vehicles. Get
rid of all guns and motor vehicles.

Of course, people will be back on horses and criminals
will be using other weapons and conveyances to inflict harm
on others.

Sen. John Chafee (R-RI) has already suggested that all
handguns be removed from private possession by means of a
national buyback followed by confiscation. The problem with
Chafee’s idea is that there still would be a lot of handguns
in private possession due to massive civil disobedience,
especially among the criminal community. He would have to
escalate his program to later include a buyback of rifles
and shotguns which could be cut down for criminal conceal-
ment. The cost of the handgun program alone is more than
Chafee can imagine, and the cost of carrying it out further

to include long guns, would be astronomical.

If we followed Chafee’s plan, we would be bankrupt as a
nation, subject to the tyrannies of both the government
which would control all arms in violation of the constitu-
tion, and forever fearful of the criminals who would still
have weapons of all kinds.

Various communities are still trying buybacks and
raising the stakes as they go. It used to be just cash
payments. Then it became theater and sporting event tick-
ets, running shoes, toys, food certificates and other mer-
chandise. In one New York City program, the combination of
cash and toy certificates upped the turn-in bounty to as
much as $175 a gun. Even that higher price failed to remove
a significant number of the 2 million guns estimated to be
in private hands in the city.

Curiously, a recent 10% discount offer from an automat-
ic transmission company in Orange County, CA. collected
just 10 guns rather than the 1,000 that had been anticipat-
ed. Apparently, only 10 people with unwanted guns also
needed transmission repairs that week.

But nowhere has the whole buyback concept gone so wrong
as Connecticut. There, the government and state lawmakers,
established a statewide buyback program funded from the
state budget and supplemented by merchandise and gift cer-
tificates donated by businesses.

Now the state is out of money and the merchandise is
not available and people are dunning the state for the money
they are owed for turning in guns. The Connecticut Post of
Bridgeport reported on Mar. 24 that one man was stilled
owed $1000 from the program conducted in February, and that
he was only one of thousands who believed the state has wea-
seled out of the deal.

Under the Connecticut deal, people would get $50 for
turning in a non-working gun at the low end up to $500 for
an “assault weapon.” Generous, perhaps, but foolhardy. On
March 31, the Connecticut Post reported that the state had
agreed to use between $100,000 and $200,000 in state funds
to bail out the gun buyback program, for guns already sur-
rendered.

As always, when the politicians make a mistake, it’s
the people who pay. If you were a Connecticut citizen and
wanted to buy guns, you’d have been better off without
having the government as a middleman. Then, at least, you’d
have something to show for your money.

Despite all of these failings, wishful and misguided
politicians, the media and community leaders keep proposing
and launching more and more expensive and useless buyback
programs all across the country, and merchants seek publici-
ty with their gift certificates. It would be interesting to
know how many millions have already been cast down this
futile rat hole, and how many millions more will be needed
before the public realizes that they’ve been scammed through
faulty thinking and outright chicanery. All because someone
wished there were no guns or crime.