Gun ‘buyback’ frauds

By Larry Pratt
? 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

Of all the ridiculous schemes put forth by the
gun-grabbers, few are more expensive and fraudulent
than the so-called “buyback” scam where police
departments pay people — usually with our hard-earned
Federal tax dollars — to turn in weapons, no questions
asked.

President Clinton is, of course, an enthusiastic supporter
of this wrongheaded idea. Ditto, the lady who organized
the Million Mom March. And now a buyback has been
held in Washington, D.C.

A press release from the D.C. Metropolitan Police
Department announces, proudly, that during its recent
three-day “buyback” 1,787 firearms were purchased at a
total cost of $141,000. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey
says this “buyback” (an absurd name since his
Department is “buying back” nothing; they never had
these guns) will “significantly reduce” the likelihood that
some minor disputes will escalate into shootings and
homicides.

But, even he admits, in this release: “We will never know
for certain just how many lives will be saved by getting
these firearms off our streets and out of our homes.”

Indeed. In fact, even the ultra-liberal, rabidly anti-gun,
vehemently anti-Second Amendment Washington Post,
ran a May 19 article quoting experts as saying that
buybacks have had little impact on crime.

This “Post” article says: “Studies show that (surprise!)
lawbreakers rarely surrender their weapons to buyback
programs and that many people who do sell their guns
have other firearms at home, or soon buy new ones.”

The Post quotes Garen Wintemute, director of the
anti-self defense Violence Prevention Research Program
at the University of California at Davis, as saying, in part,
about buybacks: “The guns that are removed from the
community do not resemble the guns used in crimes in
that community. There has never been any effect on
crime results seen.” Still, the president’s administration
has set aside $15 million to be thrown down the
buy-back rathole.

When we called the D.C. Police Department and asked
spokesman Joe Gentile if he knew of any evidence that
buybacks actually reduced crime, and we questioned the
wisdom of this program, these were, obviously, not his
favorite questions. Here’s the way it went:

Q: What evidence is there that these buy-backs
have any impact as far as reducing crime?

A: Don’t know. Gotta check because I don’t know
if they’ve run all the guns through yet. One of the
reasons we did it was to safeguard people, to get
guns out of their house, to prevent the possible
death of someone during an argument or
accidental discharge. This wasn’t just to fight
crime.

Q: But some of these buyback studies show that
those who do turn in guns don’t turn in all of their
guns. They still have a gun or guns at home.

A: They might not. We don’t know. We don’t
know. But it’s an opportunity to allow people to
get rid of weapons that are lying around their
house.

Q: But you don’t really believe that criminals turn in
their best gun or guns do you?

A: I’m not saying that. I’m saying I can’t tell you
what’s behind someone’s door. So, I won’t get into
that. …

Q: Do the people turning in the guns you buy have
to prove that they actually own the guns?

A: No.

Q: Then how do you know these guns came from
anybody’s house?

A: That’s not the point. There’s no questions
asked.

Q: But, those who turned in guns could have stolen
them.

A: Are you calling to get into a debate with me or
to ask me a question?

Q: You just said that one purpose of your
buyback was to get guns out of the houses of
some people. But, if you don’t ask for proof of
ownership, how do you know they brought the
gun or guns from their home?

A: I didn’t say where they were bringing the guns
in from. Those are your words. I said some of
these people don’t want the weapons lying around
in their homes.

Q: Right. But, I’m saying that, in actual fact, you
don’t know if any of the guns turned in were from
anybody’s home because you don’t know, and
don’t ask, where they got the guns!

A: No, I don’t.

Q: Why would no questions be asked? This would
seem to be an incentive for people to steal guns
and sell them to you.

A: Because that’s the way the law is.

Well, now. If Gentile did check about buybacks reducing
crime, he never got back to us. But, incredibly, he is right
about the law.

He sent us the text of a D.C. law (Firearms Control,
6-2375) which says that if a person voluntarily and
peaceably delivers and abandons to the chief any firearm
“such delivery shall preclude the arrest and prosecution of
such a person. … (and) no person who delivers and
abandons a firearm … shall be required to furnish
identification, photographs, or fingerprints.”

Yikes! This is crazy!

Can you imagine any program nuttier than one in which
guns are purchased — no questions asked — in a city full
of violent criminals, and no one turning in a gun is asked
to prove that he even owns the gun! This is truly insane!

Mayor Anthony Williams says his town’s buyback
program is another “important step” toward the goal of
reducing “the scourge of gun violence.” And Andrew
Cuomo, Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development,
says this buyback will make Washington D.C. “safer.”

But, these assertions are hogwash. Instead of calling their
buyback program by the ludicrous name of “Operation
Save A Life,” it should be known as “Operation Lie To
The People And Waste The Taxpayers’ Money.”

There is no answer from the buyback crowd to those
who could have been one of the nearly 7,000 people a
day who use a gun in self defense but could not –
because they were scammed out of their safety or their
life for a measly $50.