Had someone suggested in 2006 that people should be offered money for turning in guns, they would have been laughed out of the room.That’s because the idea of rewarding a person for criminal behaviour the possession of a firearm goes against all the principles that most law-abiding citizens believe in.Today, the idea is being looked at seriously, and with good reason.With gun crime out of control, it is worth looking at all options, no matter how objectionable they may seem to be at first glance.And it is inarguable that traditional gun amnesties no longer work.As new National Security Minister Wayne Perinchief said in yesterday’s Royal Gazette, recent amnesties have turned up nothing more than antiques. Those who may feel some moral obligation to turn in weapons did so long ago.So there’s a case to be made for offering a reward for turning in weapons, or, less controversially, providing information which leads to the weapons being seized.The great risk, of course, is that people will see this as a new way of making money. If turning in a weapon results in financial rewards greater than the value of the weapon, then this could create a healthy trade in which the taxpayer is the loser.There are other problems too. What happens if it turns out that the weapon was used in the commission of a murder and the person who received the reward committed the crime? If those turning in weapons were guaranteed anonymity, what would happen then?The purpose of the programme would also be damaged if the further importation of weapons was not stopped. That’s the key.Still, there are other solutions. This newspaper has long advocated the Ceasefire programme in which gang members are offered a chance to go straight and to receive employment and training.If they choose not to, then the authorities are empowered to come after them in a way that will make their lives a misery.When presented with a choice like that, many gang members make the sensible choice. There are no guarantees in this, but the evidence points towards it being a success.Similarly, programmes like Mirrors, with sufficient after-care, prevent people from entering the gang life in the first place or help them to get out of it.This newspaper is not opposed in principle to paying for guns that are turned in. Such a programme have to be planned and it would need to be of short duration last chance for gangsters.But any such programme would have to be part of a broader solution like the Ceasefire programme. And if some of those programmes worked, there would be no need to hand over money for guns.