For almost six months GCA has been barraged by e-mails from the US claimingthat Australia is in the grip of a crime wave caused by the absence of guns for people to defend themselves. Because of this ‘crime wave’ it is claimed that the post-Port Arthur gun laws have been a waste of public money, completely unsuccessful in their attempt to create a safer Australia, and that US politicians must learn from the horrid Australian experience.
When introducing the new gun laws in 1996 the prime minister, John Howard, commented that the new gun laws would stop Australia taking the American path. Now the US gun lobby has made its response – America must not take the Australian path. Whoopee.
When faced with facts that stricter gun laws help protect people, the gun lobby always attempts to invert the facts to ensure that it is impossible to protect people by removing guns because guns protect people – that’s why they buy them, silly.
Stricter gun laws are therefore a logical error and must be aimed at other purposes – correct my friend – they are aimed at assisting Australia’s totalitarian government to grind us into a pulp. Howard is a Hitler, Beazley is a Stalin. Keep your guns or die a slave. Story over. So let’s look at the details of these US claims as expounded recently in several articles in US gun magazines and newspapers. A fine example is the crammed-with-facts two full page article by a Senator H.L. Richardson (Retired) article in the January/February issue of the best selling US gun magazine ‘Guns & Ammo’.
The source of the information for the bizarre claims is probably the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia – which for some reason the retired Senator calls the Sport Shooters Association. The retired Senator also insists that Mrs Meg Lees, the well-known leader of the Australian Democrats is a he. This, however, is a minor criticism, because her party is referred to as a small but vocal group of hard leftists. This statement is plain stupid.
“The anti-gun movement which is led by hard-leftist Mrs Lees is:”
worldwide, singing the same song, telling the same untruths, pushing the same programs, introducing the same legislation. It sustains itself on outright lies, slick propaganda and the perennial gullibility of the public.
You will be pleased to hear that the Sporting Shooters Association told the ex-Senator that the Australian Constitution does not allow a person to defend themselves; this is of course incorrect, but what does that matter – the story must go on. This shooting group then debases the Australian constitution and its hard working idealist creators with the words:
Our constitution is a trade document; it has no heart or emotion. It was not fought for or defended. It is not stained by the blood of patriots as yours is.
It appears that the Sporting Shooters Association also claims that the doubling of their membership is due to shooters flocking to their cause to unite against the socialist world-wide gun control movement. The Senator is a specialist at being wrong. The self acknowledged reason that the membership of gun clubs has increased is the unfortunate clause in the post-Post Arthur gun laws which makes gun club membership a sufficient reason to own a gun.
The Senator claims that Martin Bryant was a maniac. That he was simple there is no doubt, but like the other 26 men who have committed gun massacres in Australian in the decade up to Port Arthur, it is not correct to call him or them maniacs. That term could better be given to some of the Tasmanian Premiers and Police Ministers who held office in the decade prior to 1996. These were the people who ignored the evidence from the mainland and overseas and decided rationally and coolly that a person like Martin Bryant could not exist.
The Senator seems to believe that the new gun laws have stopped Australian’s from carrying their beloved concealed handguns. In fact the new gun laws have nothing to do with handguns – in any case Australians have never wished to or been able to carry handguns.
Then there is the problem of the immense number of varmints which cover the ‘vast arid land of only 19 million people’. Once these were kept in control, says Senator Richardson, because every rural home contained a gun. The Senator is of course wrong again. When semi-auto rifles and shotguns were freely available the varmints were out of control because as everyone knows (except Senator Richardson), guns don’t help control rabbits and foxes very well at all. Now, with exemptions to the gun laws which allow rural land owners to keep their semi-auto rifles and shotguns, the cursed varmints are (you’re right), still out of control.
This litany of deceptions which have probably been inspired by the Sporting Shooters Association, massaged by the American gun lobby and spun into the hands of the retired Senator Richardson, are a hoax. Australia is not less safe because of the new gun laws, but safer. The facts show this. Here are Senator Richardson’s additional main claims.
Claim 1. There were seven million guns in Australia before the buy-back.
All the evidence suggests that the figure was closer to four and a half million.
Claim 2. 2.8 million guns should have been handed in.
It is more difficult to accurately estimate this figure due to the lack of gun registration in several large states and the poor records in others. The figure is probably between one million and 1.4 million.
Claim 3. The new gun laws have made criminals out of 2 million Australians because that number did not hand in their illegal weapons.
The figure could be as high as two thirds of a million who failed to hand-in their illegal guns. This means that, roughly two out of every five Australian gun owners chose to disobey the law. This equates to 40% of Australian gun owners being unlawful. This is a good approximation to the 40% of shooters who gun lobby leaders say refuse to register their guns. Note that this argument by the shooters makes the term ‘law abiding gun owners’ look a rather mischievous claim.
Claim 4. In 1997, just 12 months after the new laws went into effect across the continent.
The new laws did not become fully operative until well into 1997. The buy-back scheme took almost to the end of 1997. The first statistics which can be used for comparison purposes are those for 1998. In July 2000, we will have the official statistics for 1999.
These comments, however, can be made about the claims by Senator Richardson in Gun & Ammo magazine. Such claims have been repeated by US media outlets.
Claim 5. Homicides jumped 3.2%.
In 1998, compared to the average of the two years prior to new gun laws becoming operative, gun homicides fell by 35%. Murder from all causes was down by 11.5%.
Claim 6. Armed robberies were up by a whopping 44%.
The rate of increase in robbery averaged 20% in the two years prior to the new gun laws becoming operative, it fell to an increase of 10% in 1998.
Claim 7. Assaults were up 8.6%
The assault rate increased on average 9.5% in the two years before the new gun laws became operative. It was only 6% increase in the 1998.
Claim 8. In the state of Victoria there was a 300% increase in homicides.
Ha ha,the World Health Organisation has just given the capital of Victoria, Melbourne (75% of Victoria’s population) the title of ‘Safest City in the Southern Hemisphere’.In fact in the two years before the new gun laws became operative the average homicide rate per 100,000 population in Victoria was 1.25. In 1998 the homicide rate per 100,000 population in Victoria fell to 1.01. In both cases it was the lowest of the six Australian states.
Claim 9. A 42 year old father stored an unloaded high power rifle under a mattress and a low power rifle in a closet, in a rarely used room. Since he had children and did not use an approved safe he was fined $850 and placed on a 12-month good behaviour bond. The court said his crime was of a “serious nature.”
Absolutely correct Senator, and so was the court.
The attack on the new Australian gun laws is designed give heart to US gun activists at a time when they are under increasing critical examination by way of major law suits. It is also designed to weaken the resolve of US politicians to take stronger gun control measures following the recent gun tragedies in American secondary and primary schools. Don’t fall for it folks. You can never trust the gun lobby with your life or with the facts of life.
Australian gun laws still have some serious weaknesses, but one can say with confidence that in general Australian politicians do show respect for the safety of their citizens. This manifestly cannot be said about American politicians. Bad luck buddies, there’s one thing you are not good at, not good at, at all.