Gun-control advocates have long touted gun buyback programs as an effective way to reduce gun violence. But what if the data shows otherwise?
What if these programs don’t reduce crime, waste taxpayer dollars, and quietly push the message that gun ownership is a public menace?
Meet Rep. Wes Virdell
That’s the argument Texas Rep. Wes Virdell is making—and he’s backing it with legislation.
Virdell’s bill, HB 3053, would prohibit local governments from using tax dollars to fund gun buyback programs.
When asked what prompted the legislation, he was extremely candid.
“Watching cities host these events and knowing that gun buybacks don’t reduce crime or suicides motivated me to file the bill,” Virdell told GunsAmerica Digest in an exclusive interview.
He’s not wrong.
According to a 2021 National Bureau of Economic Research study, gun buybacks in the U.S. have had “little to no impact on gun crime or firearm-related violence.”
Another analysis published in Annals of Surgery found a minor potential benefit in suicide prevention among older white men but zero impact on gun violence overall.
Still, some defenders argue that every gun off the street is a win. Virdell’s response?
“Whoever makes that argument is a fool and didn’t bother to do their own research.”
A Failed Narrative
Beyond the data, Virdell believes gun buybacks promote a dangerous idea: that guns are inherently bad, and that government is the solution.
“It undermines the 2nd Amendment by creating a narrative that guns are bad and government will save us,” he said. “Any person who has even done a little historical research would know how moronic it is to believe government will save us.”
He’s not alone in that thinking. Critics of buybacks have pointed out that the firearms collected are typically low-quality, inoperable, or never used in crimes.
One 2002 study in Injury Prevention concluded that handguns turned in during Milwaukee’s buybacks were not the types commonly used in homicides or suicides.
In other words, these aren’t “crime guns”—they’re clutter guns.
Misleading Language
Even the term “buyback” is misleading. “The government can’t buy back something it never owned,” Virdell said.
It’s a phrase that suggests the state has rightful prior ownership and that civilians are simply borrowing their rights. That kind of linguistic sleight-of-hand should concern every gun owner.
Virdell’s bill doesn’t stop private citizens from selling firearms or dropping them off at a police station. It simply ends the use of public funds to incentivize a narrative of civilian disarmament.
“I am opposed to taxpayer money being spent on things that have proven to be ineffective,” he said.
Buyback Ban Headed to Governor’s Desk
After passing both chambers of the Texas Legislature, House Bill 3053 now sits on Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk.
He has until June 22 to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will automatically become law and take effect Sept. 1.
While Abbott hasn’t issued a formal statement, his strong record of supporting pro-Second Amendment legislation has many observers expecting him to sign it.
If enacted, Texas would become the first state to formally ban local taxpayer-funded gun buyback programs.
A Broader Fight Ahead
As for the future? Expect more pushback against state-funded gun control programs.
“I guarantee it. If government is attempting to undermine or discredit firearms and firearm ownership, I will be there ready to stand in their way,” Virdell said.
Whether or not HB 3053 passes this session, Virdell’s blunt-force honesty is forcing a long-overdue conversation.
Are gun buybacks ineffective, symbolic theater designed to pacify voters while doing nothing for public safety? Or are they a noble, if modest, tool in a broader violence prevention strategy?
The research leans one way. And the rhetoric from Rep. Virdell just might push it into law.
What say you? Is it time to ban gun buybacks?
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Read the full article here
