Texas Moves One Step Closer to Banning ‘Buybacks’

Texas state senators have given preliminary approval to a bill that would prohibit government-sponsored gun “buybacks” in the Lone Star State, and the measure could soon be headed to Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk for his signature. 

On Monday the Texas Senate voted in favor of advancing HB 3053 to third reading and a final vote, which could happen as early as today. The bill, which was approved by the House on a 85-56 vote earlier this month, prohibitings municipalities and counties from adopting an “ordinance, order, or other measure” in which those governments organize, sponsor, or participate a “program that purchases or offers to purchase firearms with the intent to remove firearms from circulation” or “reduce the number of firearms owned by civilians.”

During the debate, State Sen. Bob Hall (R-Edgewood) said Austin recently decided not to recommend a buyback program.

“So they decided not to have one even though they didn’t have the state of Texas telling them they didn’t have to have one,” State Sen. José Menéndez (D-San Antonio) said. “See, they didn’t need us to tell them that we didn’t have to have a buyback program. They came up with that decision on their own.”

Yes, and some localities will decide to hold these compensated confiscation events, despite a lack of any evidence of their effectiveness at reducing crime, suicide, or accidents involving firearms. 

Texas Policy Research is among the groups that’s come out in favor of HB 3053, arguing that it “aligns with all five core liberty principles—particularly individual liberty, limited government, and private property rights.”

• Individual Liberty: The bill protects individual liberty by preventing local governments from engaging in efforts that may indirectly discourage lawful firearm ownership. While buyback programs are often voluntary, they can reflect a government-endorsed judgment that civilian gun ownership is undesirable. By banning these programs at the municipal and county level, the bill ensures that individual Texans retain uninhibited access to lawfully own and keep firearms without local pressure or stigmatization.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill reinforces the idea that citizens are responsible for their own safety and the safe handling of firearms. Rather than framing gun ownership as a problem to be solved by government intervention, it treats it as a legitimate personal choice. This supports a view that Texans, not local officials, are best equipped to make decisions about firearm possession and use.
• Free Enterprise: The bill eliminates the potential for local governments to intervene in or distort the private firearms market. Government-funded buyback programs can inflate demand for used firearms or remove them from circulation in a way that artificially alters the market. By restricting public-sector participation, the bill reinforces a marketplace in which private firearm transactions are guided by voluntary exchange and market forces.
• Private Property Rights: Firearms are legally owned private property. Although buyback programs are voluntary, their very premise often encourages citizens to dispose of personal property, sometimes at below-market value, as a matter of public policy. Prohibiting these government-sponsored efforts affirms the principle that individuals should control their property without government prompting or moral framing.
• Limited Government: At its core, the bill is a limitation on local governmental authority. It ensures that municipalities and counties cannot use taxpayer dollars or regulatory authority to shape firearm ownership patterns. This is consistent with a broader constitutionalist view that government powers should be narrow, defined, and not used to influence personal decisions through indirect incentives or social engineering.

If Abbott does sign the “buyback” ban into law I’ll be very curious to see other red states will soon follow suit. A “buyback” ban could prove popular in Second Amendment-friendly states, especially those that have a handful of liberal bastions where “buybacks” are a reliable source of good press for anti-gun politicians. 

I’m also interested in seeing if it’s challenged in court; either by a local government or one of the groups that have worked with politicians in places like San Antonio and Houston to put on these compensated confiscation events in the past. I’d say the legislature is on solid legal ground in prohibiting the use of state funds to purchase and destroy firearms, but a judge may view things differently if a city is relying on private donations or local tax dollars to engage in these wasteful and unnecessary endeavors.

It could make for an interesting legal fight, but I’d hope that if HB 3053 becomes law these counties and municipalities decide not to waste taxpayer dollars challenging the law in court, and instead use that money (and the funds designated for a “buyback”) on things that actually can reduce violent crime… and do so without disparaging our Second Amendment rights.