As a direct result of increased gun violence, the debate about implementing gun buyback programs flairs up. However, there is no proven evidence that any such gun buyback program will be effective in reducing the violence. All of these efforts will go in vain.

Those who believe that gun buyback programs will reduce violence make the assumption that reduction of lethal weapons among the general population will reduce violent crimes. It requires people to voluntary participation in such a program in order to not violate their constitutional right. However, the reduction of crime via such programs is not guaranteed at all, and making it mandatory in an undue involvement of the government in the lives of the people.

Firstly, gun buybacks programs do not decrease violent crimes in a particular place. Research has shown that the guns that are retrieved in these programs are not the type of firearms that are likely to be used in a homicide or a mass shooting. While mass shootings committed with assault weapons draw national media attention, these crimes are quite rare.

Most of the mass shootings and violence occurred due to the mental condition of the perpetrator and not due to the presence of guns in the community. Instead of focusing on the gun buyback program, the federal government should institute programs to prevent those with mental and emotional issues from possessing these weapons.

One of the major problems with these programs is that it collects very few guns compared to the number of guns present in a community. Furthermore, the collected weapons are usually old and are more likely to be submitted by those who are least likely to commit a crime. Even the potential criminals who participate in these programs usually handover only those firearms which are of no use to them.

The better approach to reduce crimes involving assault weapons is to introduce structural #reforms within the law enforcement agencies and better tackling of socioeconomic forces that drive these crimes. Experts have suggested that a targeted police patrol, intervention efforts with known criminals, and robust and better gun laws are more effective than gun buyback programs for assault weapons. Similarly, providing people with a social safety net and economic security that improves their general well-being can cause a decline in violent gun crimes.

Hence, the simple and overt task of assault weapon reduction by the gun buyback program is not the way forward. Instead, it will create a panic in the people who might think that their constitutional rights are being snatched, resulting in protests all over the country. Public awareness, better laws and law enforcement, along with economic and social security, are the better approaches than a gun buyback programs to mitigate crimes involving assault weapons.