While it is difficult to compare the reasons for weapons possession and proliferation across regions and even more difficult to do so across hemispheres, what can be equated are the methods used to collect weapons, which are often similar, regardless of the means of earlier supply. In recent years various attempts have been made to collect weapons from individuals or groups who have firearms that have either become surplus, are considered dangerous in the prevailing security situation, or will become banned under new or revised legislation. One means of collecting these weapons is through VWCPs, which include amnesties, gun buy-back or exchange programmes.

These programmes have been used in a wide range of situations: United Nations mandated peace operations; inner cities and rural towns in the United States; in Australia to collect weapons that are banned under new legislation; and in post-conflict situations, such as countries of Central America, Africa, and Europe. Often the current situation dictates the type of weapon that will be turned in. For example, in the United States most firearms collected are rifles, shotguns or handguns, while in former conflict areas a much broader array of weaponry, including machine guns, ordnance, grenades and mortars, is collected.

It is often in reaction to a local event in which a firearm was the 'tool' used that a community or neighbourhood chooses to implement a VWCP. Examples include the accidental shooting of a child, the murder of a local community leader, or the suicide of a teenager. The response is to find a way to remove these tools from the area, voluntarily and as a community initiative.

Governments have also implemented such programmes, the largest to date being the one recently concluded in Australia, but others have been undertaken, including in Nicaragua. In addition to these local or national efforts to collect weapons, disarmament as part of peacekeeping operations, either by the United Nations or other coalitions, has also used VWCPs as a means of allowing citizens to turn in weapons which would otherwise be subject to seizure. Such programmes have been held in Haiti, Eastern Slavonia, in the former Yugoslavia, and in Albania following the unrest there.

While the approach of a local community or a government differs from that of a UN military-style operation, not only in terms of the organisers, communities involved and the incentives used to encourage participation, but also the precipitating conditions, the objectives and the way in which these programmes are implemented are similar.

The majority of the programmes operate on a 'no questions asked' basis, combined with an amnesty from prosecution. Even those which do ask questions of participants do not record the name of the person turning in the weapon. The number of weapons collected ranges from a handful in some United States cities to 600 000 in Australia. Sometimes voluntary weapons collection programmes are conducted in conjunction with other tactics, a 'carrot and stick' approach, in which voluntary surrender is followed by increased policing, search and seizure operations, and stiffer penalties for illegal weapons possession. Others are the kick-off for longer-term education and outreach programmes or part of broader rehabilitation programmes for ex-combatants in former conflict areas.

VWCPs have varying objectives depending, in part, on the situation which stimulated the programme, the politics involved and the function of the group which has undertaken the programme. The goals of community groups who run VWCPs are often to "publicize the connection between weapons and violence, develop norms against such use, and lower the number of weapons available for crime and violence".5 In contrast, in Haiti, the United States army ran a gun buy-back programme to collect weapons in circulation prior to handing the operation over to the United Nations peacekeeping force. The army's mandate was to ensure a secure and stable environment, and they used the gun buy-back as one means of achieving this end by reducing the visibility (firearms carried on the street were seized) and the number of available weapons.

VWCPs include three main types: amnesties, buy-backs in which weapons are exchanged for money, and exchanges in which weapons are traded for non-cash incentives. Each of these methods is elaborated on below.

Amnesties

Amnesty programmes are the least complex of the three types of collection programmes, and often are not collection programmes at all. There are several uses for amnesties. These are:

To allow unlicensed or lapsed-license owners to register their firearms; and


For the collection of weapons that may become illegal under new legislation.

Amnesties are also often a component of either a gun buy-back or exchange programme. In such cases, the weapon is turned in during an amnesty period for one of the above reasons, but some type of incentive is offered for the firearm.

Gun Buy-Back Programmes

The term 'gun buy-back programme' should refer only to those instances in which a weapon is bought by the collecting agency for cash or vouchers to be redeemed for cash. Other forms of remuneration, such as gift vouchers, farming tools, toys and computers, are technically in-kind incentives which replace cash and so are part of the exchange programmes discussed below. However the term 'gun buy-back' is often used to refer to all types of VWCPs.

The reasons for conducting buy-back programmes are broader than those for amnesties and often attract more attention. Recent examples of gun buy-backs include Haiti, Panama, various United States cities and Australia. Remuneration is offered for weapons based on either the black market price or a percentage of it (as was done in Haiti) or on average sales prices from dealers' catalogues, as was the case in Australia.

The basic premise of a gun buy-back is that a community, an organisation or a government decides that weapons which are currently in circulation should be collected. As such, collection points are identified; co-operation with local law enforcement agencies is agreed upon; a set of prices for compensation is devised, generally based on the type of firearm; a duration for the programme is set; and a publicity campaign is initiated. Organisers have found that the number of weapons turned in is influenced greatly by the prices offered, the amount of publicity and the location of the collection site. For example, if a location site is a police station in an area where there is distrust of law enforcement, this can deter participation.

Exchange Programmes

Exchange programmes have become popular due to some of the negative effects of offering cash for weapons. Examples include the creation of a weapons market, as people use the cash received from a weapon that was turned in at a buy-back to purchase additional, cheaper, firearms to turn in, and firearms dealers who have used the opportunity of a buy-back to rid their stores of excess and obsolete stocks. While there are ways to reduce both of these abuses, many organisers have instead chosen to use in-kind incentives rather than cash as the 'payment' for a weapon.

Incentives offered vary greatly, depending in large part upon the needs of the community in which the exchange programme is operating. For example, in Nicaragua farming implements, clothing and motor vehicles were used as incentives, while in the United States concert tickets, used computers and gift vouchers to local stores have become popular.