Police Trade Cash For Thousands of Guns Each Year. But Experts Say It Does Little to Stem Violence. Holy common sense Batman! Billionaire anti-ballistic bully boy Michael Bloombergs anti-gun agitprop propagators just re-published an article from July 15 that totally flew under our radar. And it rips gun buybacks a new one! Specifically, The Trace admits that . . .
There’s no evidence that gun buybacks actually curb gun violence. Though the events have become ubiquitous in the U.S. since the ’90s, they’re coupled with a number of academic studies that pointedly demonstrate the ways that buybacks fail to reduce crime. “[Studies show that] the guns you get back are nonfunctioning, that we’re paying money and we’re not getting real benefits,” Ralph Fascitelli, the president of Washington CeaseFire, a Seattle-based gun safety organization, tells The Trace. “They’re just feel-good things that don’t do much real good.”
Well I’ll be damned. The article doesn’t contain a quote from ONE supporter of “gun buybacks.” In fact, the article raises all the issues that TTAG’s been banging-on about for years – save the fact that the “no questions asked” events create a government-sponsored black market for stolen guns. Check this out:
The “no questions asked” policy shared by most buybacks can also make them vulnerable to what Tabarrok calls “gun entrepreneurs,” generally private sellers who use the events to profit off their local government. He cited a particularly notorious 2008 buyback in Oakland, California, where police bought handguns and assault rifles for $250 each. The event attracted local gun dealers, who bought cheap guns out-of-state and sold them back to the government for a profit. A 2006 Boston buyback also attracted out-of-state gun dealers looking to offload some of their old inventory. It became such an issue that when the city relaunched its buyback program in 2014, police began questioning donors to make sure they really were from Boston.
The closest The Trace gets to stating that “gun buybacks” serve any useful purpose whatsoever is this quote:
“Experienced police officers will have a sense that [gun buybacks] are likely to be of marginal value,” says Michael Scott, director of the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing. “I think that’s safe to say that the primary function of a gun buyback program is to do something symbolic.”
Does this mean that gun control advocates will abandon “gun buybacks”? I doubt it. The events are beloved by politicians who want to be seen as “doing something” about “gun violence.” Even so, this is a welcome admission by an arm of America’s most prominent gun control advocacy group that “buybacks” are a waste of time and money.
To the point where I wonder if Trace scribe Kate Masters and her editors will get a call from Mr. Bloomberg, and whether this post will remain online. We shall see . . .