"buy back" doesn't imply destroy. If I sell something to you then buy it back from you, there is no implication that I subsequently destroy whatever it was.
Your position in this whole sub-thread is very odd.
My position is whatever you think of gov “buyback” programs, the name being misleading isn’t a valid criticism. Nobody thinks the implication is the government sold you the gun in the first place. Sure, it’s a slightly irregular use of the term “buyback”, but governments and corporations and people use language irregularly all the time and it means very little.
