View from the US: "Trade in Your Gun for Cash and Ham"

Would you be prepared to exchange your rifle for a ticket to a Beyonce concert? That is precisely what has been suggested to New York weapon owners by Michael “Blue” Williams, the well-known manager of many hip-hop artists in the states. If that doesn’t tempt you, how about $200 in cash and a training course? Baptized “Guns for Greatness,” his program targets young black and Latino-Americans, those most likely to fall victim to gun violence in the country. So far, he has raised $75,000 and involved several artists, such as Justin Timberlake and Eminem, in the project.

Since the Newtown massacre last December, in which a highly armed and mentally unstable young person charged into a primary school, killing 20 students and six adults and shocking the country, gun buyback programs have multiplied.

$100-$200 for Each Returned Weapon

In California, one anonymous donor organized two operations in Oakland and San Francisco, financing a commercial in which he promised between $100 and $200 for each returned weapon and guaranteed a “no questions asked” policy on their origins. All weapons were handed over to the police and subsequently destroyed.

Two brothers from Massachusetts contributed $2,600 to cover the cost of returning 26 weapons, in homage to the 26 victims of the tragedy.

In Blytheville, Arkansas, a group of local bosses and pastors offered $75 and … a ham.

Most of these initiatives are organized by local authorities who are tired of waiting for the Republicans and the Democrats to cease being bogged down in a fruitless stalemate and finally agree on the subject. Some offer cash; others offer coupons for Amazon and other big chains, concert seats or tickets for big sports events.

$75 and Baseball or Hockey Match Tickets

At the end of December, New Jersey authorities offered a check of $100 to all residents in exchange for every returned weapon, again with neither questions nor discussion of the weapons’ origin and a guarantee of anonymity. Once the police had checked to see if they were lost or stolen, the weapons were destroyed and the metal recycled.

The record is held by Camden, Pennsylvania, near Philadelphia, one of the most dangerous cities in the US: 2,600 weapons were exchanged in two days, 700 of which were illegal. A similar result was seen in Tampa, Florida, where the authorities, who were offering $75 and tickets for hockey or baseball matches, received twenty-odd stolen arms.

As always, these very popular operations receive high media coverage, with the state’s attorney general proudly displaying the results of the campaign by posing in front of a mountain of weapons, pistols, rifles and shotguns.

“Buyback Program”

In Trenton, the neighboring county, which was offering up to $250 per piece depending on the model and the condition of the firearm, the success of this “buyback program” has exceeded all expectations, going way beyond the $100,000 budget which it was granted. To honor their commitment in the program, the authorities have offered supermarket coupons.

Since December, the state of New Jersey has spent $1.2 million and recovered over 9,000 firearms. Around 60 similar operations have been carried out in the country and around 15 are still to come. Thanks to these, the country has collected in 28,000 weapons since the tragedy.

The idea is not a new one. The first programs were introduced in the ‘60s and regularly resurface after each tragedy. They were organized on a wide scale twice in Australia, not as part of a voluntary scheme, as in the U.S., but rather as a compulsory return program, financed by an exceptional solidarity tax. According to the New York police, who for five years have regularly organized this type of operation, these buyback programs are efficient and contribute to reducing violence.

Recurring Criticisms

But the programs are not without criticism. According to Jon Vernick, a researcher at John Hopkins University who has studied the subject, there is no correlation between the buyback operations and a decrease in crime. In his opinion, this public money could be put to better use, notably for preventative purposes. He is not alone in denouncing the bargaining effect; others emphasize that the returned weapons, old and often unusable, are not generally the most dangerous ones and that those who return them — women and old people — do not really fit the profile of those whom the program is actually targeting.

Another undesired consequence is the black market. Since the Newtown massacre, the price of firearms has shot up. Droves of collectors and other weapon-lovers are descending on gun stores in fear of a regulation of public powers. The result? We have seen in some cities, such as Seattle, private touts with pockets full of cash turning up to solicit the buyback candidates standing in line.

How Many Lives Saved?

It is difficult to say how many lives this program has saved — how many suicides, how many armed attacks have been avoided. Nor is it easy to measure the long-term impact and educational value of these programs.

There are 310 million firearms in circulation in the country; 4 million new arms arrive on the market every year. In Chicago alone, there is at least one weapon-related death per day and over 500 homicides last year.

In the absence of a miracle solution in a country so deeply attached to its second amendment, perhaps we should content ourselves with the remarks of one Illinois pastor: “If these programs can contribute to saving only one life, it’s worth it. Just imagine that it’s yours.”*

*Editor’s Note: Although accurately translated, this quotation could not be verified.