“The failure of the Australian policy has been years in the making,” westernjournalism.com reports. “’There is little evidence to suggest that (the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program) had any significant effects on firearm homicides,’ University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi wrote in 2008. ‘Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears, the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths,’ they added.”

As usual, facts have little to nothing to do with anti-gun policy, especially in the Land Down Under. And so we’re not surprised to read Reuters report that “Australia on Friday announced a gun amnesty for next year after a criminal intelligence report estimated there were 260,000 illegal firearms in the country.”

“The amnesty will provide an opportunity for those individuals who, for whatever reason are in possession of an unregistered firearm, to hand it in without fear of being prosecuted,” Justice Minister Michael Keenan told reporters in Melbourne. “While Australia has some of the strongest firearm controls in the world, illicit firearms remain the weapon of choice for criminals.”

What does that tell you? One thing’s for sure: it tells presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and the rest of the American civilian disarmament complex absolutely nothing. Should Ms. Clinton become president, how long before Americans are contemplating an amnesty for illegal “assault weapons”?