This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 132.234.251.211 (talk) at 00:40, 23 August 2005 (→Port Arthur massacre). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:40, 23 August 2005 by 132.234.251.211 (talk) (→Port Arthur massacre)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Gun politics, and in particular, gun control in Australia was, before 1996, largely an issue for state governments. Historically, Australia has always had tough restrictions on handguns (requiring shooters to be members of registered gun clubs, and conducting extensive police checks on pistol shooters), whilst rifles and shotguns were considerably less restricted, with the only real restrictions on fully-automatic rifles.
In Australia, firearm advocacy organisations have never approached the strength of the National Rifle Association (NRA) in the United States and political sympathisers generally are quite discreet in their support. The perceived lack of support by politicians is generally attributed to the distribution of electoral seats in Australia, with a vast majority of electorates lying over areas with high population density, places with obviously much lower gun ownership rates.
Significant changes to firearms control in Australia have usually followed a high profile spree killing. In 1987, the Hoddle Street spree killing and the Queen Street spree killing took place in Melbourne, Victoria. In response, several Australian states required the registration of all guns, restricted the availability of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. However, firearm laws in several states, including Queensland and Tasmania, remained relatively relaxed.
Port Arthur massacre
Things changed drastically with the Port Arthur massacre in 1996. The killing of 35 people saw an outcry around the country and gun control advocates, the politicians, and the media used the emotional outcry of the community to push for the nationwide banning of semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns from licenced, law-abiding firearm owners, and more stringent requirements to obtain a gun licence.
Several states, most notably Queensland, objected to the changes, believing them to be too restrictive (for instance, restricting the ownership of semi-automatic small-calibre weapons with relatively weak terminal ballistics) and that gun-control advocates were exaggerating the effectiveness of the changes (a still-legal century-old .30-06 bolt action rifle has far more kinetic energy than modern small-caliber weapons, is capable of inflicting greater damage through barriers, and is more accurate at range). Firearms advocates opposed the changes on this basis, as well as their belief that disarming law-abiding citizens only assists spree killers and criminals.
Newly elected Prime Minister John Howard, already known to be a strong advocate of gun control, sought a national agreement to tighten laws, eventually threatening recalcitrant states with the possibility of a constitutional referendum (which, in the climate, would almost certainly have passed) to transfer power over gun laws to the Commonwealth as well as threatening to cut off Federal funding to the States and Territories and promises to help extinguish Native Title claims. The American group, the National Rifle Association endeavoured to intervene in the issue by supporting gun advocates, but their involvement was not well-received by some in the Australian public. Eventually, agreement was reached between the states and the changes went through.
The Howard Government introduced a 1% levy on income tax for a period of one year to finance the "buy back" (or confiscation and destruction) of all legally-held semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns from licenced, law-abiding firearm owners. This scheme was subject to criticism in its implementation (apparently some of the confiscated weapons ended up back on sale in gun shops), but, on the whole, televised images of large numbers of rifles and shotguns being crushed by heavy machinery were well-received by a section of the Australian public. Others such as the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia have derided the $A500 million gun buyback as an immense failure - in 1995 67 Australians died from homicides-by-firearm. The same year 54 died of accidental aspirin overdose. . As a comparison, in 2003 2213 Australians died from suicide and in 2004 the federal government spent $A10 million on the National Advisory Council on Suicide Prevention.
Following the firearms laws changes, John Howard apparently took the precaution of wearing a bullet-proof vest while addressing a gathering of pro-firearm advocates, an unusual step for an Australian politician at the time. The incident left an impression among those who opposed the 1996 gun laws that John Howard dislikes all forms of legal gun ownership among law-abiding Australian citizens as well as him using the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre for his own personal political gain. Another example of John Howard's dislike for legal gun ownership came in the form of a Sydney radio interview in 2002 where he said that he hates guns as well as saying that he sees the legal ownership of firearms as an "American disease".
The attitudes towards law-abiding firearm owners and the opponents of the 1996 gun laws by the politicians of Australia, the media, the anti-gun movement and the community in aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre and the rapid introduction of the 1996 gun laws were an example of moral panic on a large scale with many people using law-abiding firearm owners and those who opposed the 1996 gun laws (both gun owning and non-gun owning) as scapegoats for what happened at Port Arthur. Also, the rapid introduction of the 1996 gun laws highlights serious flaws in Australian democracy with the parliament rapidly passing these laws withot proper debate and scrutiny of these laws as well as threatening politicians who hold pro-gun sentiments and objected to the bans, but are members of political parties that back the bans, with removal from the party if they didn't support the political party's line and stance on the gun laws.
Monash University shootings
Laws remained static until 2002, when a pistol-owning international student killed two fellow students at Monash University in Victoria, prompting a reexamination of existing handgun laws. As in 1996, the Federal Government prompted State Governments to review handgun laws, and as a result, amended legislation was adopted in all states and territories. Key changes included an arbitrary 10 round magazine capacity limit, a caliber limit of less than .38, a firearm length limit of not less than 120mm, a more strict sporting requirement for handgun purchase, mandatory safe inspections, etc. These new laws were also derided by the gun-owning public, citing such factors as small-caliber centerfire loadings (cited as "high powered" in the popular media) being perfectly lethal and far more effective at armor penetration, that longer barrels inherently give better accuracy and greater terminal ballistics, and that a person carrying two legal 10 round magazines can shoot just as many times as a man carrying a more expensive and bulky 20 round magazine.
The new changes had a significant impact on gun ownership in Australia, requiring many law-abiding gun owners to relinquish their property for compensation, some for less than a tenth of market value, some for a good deal more than their value. This buyback was widely criticized - in the state of Victoria $A21 million was spent buying back 18,124 firearms, while in the same period Victorians imported 15,184 firearms. In most cases, gun owners did not give up their hobby, but simply exchanged now illegal firearms for new legal firearms, obviating any perceived safety value in permanently removing firearms from circulation.
Firearms and crime in Australia
According to government reports, more than 98% of all firearm related homicides are committed by unregistered firearms. In 1997-1999, more than 80% of the handguns confiscated were never legally purchased or registered in Australia. Knives are used up to 3 times as often as firearms in robberies.
The number of unregistered or uncontrolled firearms continues to increase, with an average of over 4,000 firearms stolen a year, primarily from residences (although one gun-dealer had approximately 600 firearms stolen sometime between 1999 and 2000). Concern has been raised about the number of smuggled pistols reaching Australia, particularly in New South Wales. This has in fact become a hot issue in recent times as some people are becoming more sympathetic to private gun owners and the burdensome restrictions placed on them, forcing the political climate to focus more on the criminals using the weapons and less on the weapons themselves.
Firearm sports at the Olympics
Some change in public attitudes to firearms has been attributed by many to publicity for high profile shooters, such as the recent overwhelming success of Australian athletes in firearm sports at the Olympics. The plight of Olympic athlete Michael Diamond, and his struggle with the gun laws before competing in the games in order to try to break a long standing Australian gold medal record.