Australian Gun Control Ineffective after 10 years

The introduction of Australia’s tough new gun laws in 1996 has done little to reduce the rate of gun murder or suicide.

The new laws – which were accompanied by a $500 million buyback of more than 600,000 guns – came after the Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, where 35 people were gunned down.

A study, prepared by Australian pro-gun lobbyists and published in the British Journal of Criminology, argues that the money spent on the buyback would have been better spent on a public health campaign.

Source: ABC Australia

The laws were introduced by Prime Minister John Howard and banned self-loading rifles as well self-loading and pump-action shotguns and gave owners a 12-month amnesty to hand in weapons and receive compensation.

But the paper, written by Jeanine Baker – from the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia and Samara McPhedran from the International Coalition for Women in Shooting and Hunting – argues that Australia is no safer because of the buyback.

The authors say that early intervention programs would have been more effective at reducing gun deaths.

“In 1996 we were told that buying back those civilian firearms off licensed firearm owners would make society safer and would reduce firearm deaths. The evidence isn’t there to support that,” Jeanine Barker said.

While the study relies on the premise that mass shootings precipitated the policy change, nowhere does it mention that since Port Arthur, Australia has not seen any mass gun murders.

But Ms Baker says the study looked at overall gun deaths and the national firearms agreement.

“In terms of mass murder, there has been mass murder since Port Arthur, they haven’t been with a firearm,” she said.

She says that when it comes to suicide deaths, governments in Australia have pursued the wrong policies.

“If the money spent on gun control in 1996 had been spent on suicide prevention programs or mental health programs we would have saved a lot more lives,” she said.

Professor of Public Health at the University of Sydney and anti-gun advocate, Simon Chapman, says the research should not be taken seriously because it does not address the specific reason for the introduction of the laws – that is, the incidence of mass gun murders in Australia.

“John Howard introduced these new gun laws as a specific response to the Port Arthur massacre and to the 11 massacres which had occurred in the 10 years before that where 100 people died,” Professor Chapman said.

He says the gun laws on hand guns still need some tightening up.

“There’s been a proliferation of hand guns in recent years, but I think generally speaking that the gun law situation in Australia remains one of the toughest in the world and that’s to the great disappointment of the gun lobby in Australia and internationally.”