When it comes to feel-good window dressing that politicians use to show that they’re “fighting crime,” it doesn’t get any more ridiculous than gun buybacks.

Check out all of articles in the Fall edition of Long Range Shooting, GunsAmerica’s newest specialty publication.

I’ve written about this before but I saw something recently that so succinctly articulated my thoughts on the matter that I felt like I had to share it.

In a recent interview, SUNY Buffalo State associate professor Scott W. Phillips shattered the narrative that buybacks reduce crime.

“Does it work? No,” Phillips told The Buffalo News. The professor looked at city crime data in relation to five gun buybacks held between 2007 and 2012 and found no evidence — zero evidence — that they reduce crime.

“Should they keep doing it? I wouldn’t bother wasting their time,” he added.

When’s the last time you’ve heard an academic speak candidly about the foolishness of gun buybacks?

Probably never.

I found that refreshing. Q. Do they reduce crime Mr. Professor? A. No. Q. Should they keep doing it Mr. Professor? A. Shouldn’t waste their time.

Phillips went on to say that there is no academic research that indicates buybacks curb suicides or accidental shootings. And he confirmed what many of us already knew, the majority of the guns sold are rarely the types used in crimes, i.e. long guns, and many of them are broken.

Photos from a buyback in near Buffalo, NY. (Derek Gee/Buffalo News file photo}

When an independent, third-party soundly refutes the merits of a scheme that, in some cases, wastes taxpayer dollars, you would think that the leaders of the city would pay attention. You think they would cut their losses and end the charade. Right? Wrong.

Niagara Falls Police Superintendent E. Bryan DalPorto admitted that gang members won’t be turning up en masse to sell their piece to the po-po, yet he still hung on to the notion that they serve a purpose.

“We get folks that just want an outlet to get rid of unwanted firearms,” DalPorto said.

SEE ALSO: House Democrat Proposes National ‘Buyback’ Bill

What he really means to say is that folks want a way to get something for nothing, a way to get some money for their junk.

Now, in the cases where folks are actually turning in functioning firearms, I’m one thousand percent sure that there are plenty of local pawn shops and gun stores that would happily adopt those unwanted firearms.

Buybacks are stupid. When are elected officials going to realize this? I mean, the name itself should give it away. Why is it a buyback? Those guns never belonged to the government!

If you ask me, I think they use the term “buyback” because it perpetuates the falsity that the government allows us to keep and bear arms, which as we all know is claptrap.

The Second Amendment isn’t a gift from government. It’s an existing right of the people. The whole point of the Constitution is to keep the grubby hands of government off our basic freedoms and liberties, including the 2A.

With buybacks though, you get that sneaking suspicion that big brother is signaling to the public, You know, the only reason you have those guns is because we let you. They belong to us. You belong to us. Go ahead now, be a good boy and turn them over. We’ll give you a $20 gas card for your trouble.