Shaquille O’Neal made a total fool of himself by becoming the poster boy for one of Democrats’ biggest anti-Second Amendment lies yet

Photo by Specna Arms from Pexels

Shaquile O’Neal is one of the most popular players in NBA history. 

With his playing days behind him he’s used his humor and charisma to form a second career as an analyst for TNT’s Inside the NBA. 

And Shaquille O’Neal made a total fool of himself by becoming the poster boy for one of Democrats’ biggest anti-Second Amendment lies yet.

Come and take it

Democrats aren’t the biggest fans of the Bill of Rights. 

They’re consistently at odds with Americans’ most fundamental rights. 

While the woke mob screams about non-existent rights to things like free healthcare, free education, and free abortion on-demand up until – and often after – the moment of birth, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of the non-Democrat-controlled media are constantly under attack. 

And there may be no basic and guaranteed right more in danger of going extinct than the right to keep and bear arms. 

In fact, Democrats have just converted a celebrity athlete, and one who likes to pretend he’s a real life law enforcement officer, into a literal gun-grabber. 

Shaq attack on the second amendment

NBA legend Shaquile O’Neal just sponsored a supposed “gun buyback” program in Dallas, Texas. 

First, the term “buyback” is a misnomer since the government didn’t sell the guns in the first place. 

It’s really just an opportunity for the government to use your tax dollars to buy your guns for a below-market price.

Shaq teamed up with the Dallas County Sheriff for the gimmick. 

“I support (Dallas County) Sheriff (Marian) Brown’s initiatives; Sheriff is doing the right thing and keeping our communities safe.”

It was held at the Sheriff’s Academy. 

The 15-time All-Star donated money to provide firearm owners with a measly $100 gift cards for returned handguns, and $150 vouchers for long guns. 

Sheriff Brown is under the mistaken impression that a “gun buyback” will reduce violent crime – a common gaslighting line from Democrats.

“This is an opportunity for law enforcement to educate and equip community members with the tools to properly dispose of unwanted firearms,” Sheriff Brown said. “Too many deaths have occurred from firearms lying around and they end up in the hands of the vulnerable population.”

Gun buyback gaslighting debunked

Democrats often points to Australia’s mandatory “gun buyback” as evidence it lowers violent crime. 

Of course, since it wasn’t voluntary, it wasn’t a buyback at all, it was a confiscation. 

And a deeper look at the numbers reveals the buyback did little to nothing to curb crime. 

Take for example this headline from Vox: “Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.”

But did they, really? 

First of all, Vox got the number wrong. 

There were actually more than 700,000 guns confiscated and it cost Australian taxpayers about $700 million for the program. 

As the Foundation for Economic Education reported, the trend line in violent crime was already trending down quickly. 

In fact, if the “buyback” had any effect at all, it may have slowed the downward trend in crime at the time. 

As you learn in high school science, correlation does not equal causation – just because crime went down following the “buyback” doesn’t mean crime went down because of the “buyback.” 

Especially when you consider crime rates were already heading in that direction anyway. 

“Several peer-reviewed studies… have proven that the implementation of tough gun-control measures, known as the ‘National Firearms Agreement,’ have done nothing to reduce homicide and suicide rates with a firearm,” James Walsh, executive officer at the Shooting Industry Foundation of Australia (SIFA), said. “Given the data outlined in various studies, it can only be concluded that this exercise was simply a failure.”

A 2015 report from the International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences (IJCJS) came to a similar conclusion. 

“A succession of studies from different research groups, using a variety of different time series and analytical methods, have considered whether there is evidence that the legislative changes had significant impacts on firearm-related deaths,” the report stated. “None of these studies has found a significant impact of the Australian legislative changes on the pre-existing downward trend in firearm homicide.”

Even researchers from the University of Melbourne were forced to admit the praise of the “gun buyback” program was highly overhyped. 

“There is little evidence to suggest that [the NFA] had any significant effects on firearm homicides,” their report read. “The evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.”

The research from the University of Melbourne was concluded all the way back in 2008, but yet Democrats are still using Australia as the model to confiscate guns. 

And, unfortunately, even Shaq has fallen for it.

Will so-called “gun buyback” programs somehow reduce violent crime in the United States?