Australia solved the gun problem. We can too

By Reese Erlich | ( 48Hills.org) | – –

A mass shooting created real reform Down Under — and strict gun control has worked.

Progressives aren’t supposed to say this. But none of the major gun control proposals now being debated in Washington would actually stop mass shootings. I know that sounds heretical, or even worse, like an echo of the National Rifle Association line. But it’s true.

48hillsAR15An AR-15 style assault rifle, perfectly legal in the US

Let’s take a look:

Ban sales of AR-15 and other assault rifles. Assault rifles are deadly. But other semi-automatic weapons, which would not be banned, are just as dangerous. And even if all semi-automatic rifles were banned, Americans still have access to plenty of deadly ordinance. In 1966 a shooter at the University of Texas used a bolt action and pump action rifles to murder 14 and wound 31.

Better background checks will stop the shooters. Such checks might stop a random shooter or two, but almost all the recent mass killers would have passed background checks. Proposed stricter background checks would not stop gun sales to the severely mentally ill.

Require gun purchasers to be 21. Ask any teens who have had an adult buy them bottles of alcohol how well that works. In a number of recent shootings, young teens stole guns from their parents’ gun cabinets.

There’s a fundamental flaw in gun reform laws currently under consideration. America is flooded with firearms. Potential mass murderers have access to tens of millions of legal and illegal guns. The spousal abuser or the psychopath can find a very deadly weapon with relative ease. So even the most positive, partial reforms won’t solve the problem.

Don’t get me wrong. I support significant reform measures — but for political reasons — not because they will have much immediate impact. The NRA’s stranglehold on US politics must be broken. Oregon took a good step recently by prohibiting domestic abusers and those subject to restraining orders from owning guns. Banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines would definitely weaken the gun lobby’s power.

And I think it’s time Americans seriously consider gun reform that would actually stop mass killings. Australians did it and so can we.

The US and Australia share some common history. The British sent settlers to occupy colonial land, although the Australians had to get out of prison first. Both countries encouraged gun ownership by white settlers, Rebecca Peters, a representative of Australia’s International Action Network on Small Arms, told me. “Early settlers depended on killing animals and the indigenous people who lived there before.”

And in modern times both countries had strong gun lobbies paid for by firearm manufacturers. The Australian gun lobby had blocked effective gun control at both the federal and state levels.

For Australians, everything changed on April 28, 1996. That day a young curly haired, blond man brought an AR-15 and another semi–automatic rifle to the popular tourist town of Pt. Arthur in southeastern Tasmania. He fired randomly, killing 35 people and wounding 18. The massacre of men, women and children shocked Australians much like the Parkland, Florida impacted Americans.

But the Aussies did something about it.

Just 12 days after the shooting, conservative Prime Minister John Howard brought together legislators to pass comprehensive, national gun control laws. But what appeared to be a legislative miracle was actually the culmination of years of grass-roots efforts.

Local activists and public health professionals had been educating the public since the late 1980s, said Peters. They found a sympathetic audience among trade unionists and some Labor Party politicians. “We built a solid grassroots movement,” she said. “We didn’t just leap into tragedy mode after a shooting.”

Sponsored link

Activists called for universal gun registration, and it was just as controversial in Australia as in the US. The gun lobby argued that the government would confiscate everyone’s guns.

Simon Chapman, emeritus professor in public health at the University of Sydney, remembers the most effective argument gun reform campaigners made on that topic.

“We register cars,” he would say. “We register boats. We even register dogs. So what’s the problem in registering guns?”

So in the spring of 1996, the federal parliament passed a comprehensive measures that included:

All semi-automatic rifles and pump action shotguns were banned, as were high capacity magazines.

The government purchased existing firearms that had been banned, paying retail plus 10 percent.

All firearms were registered and new buyers were required to prove a “genuine reason” for gun ownership such as hunting or target practice at a shooter’s club.

New gun owners must wait 28 days to take delivery, be subject to a comprehensive background check, and take a gun safety course.

The results were striking. There have been no mass shootings. Gun murders and suicides have dropped precipitously. There are 200 fewer deaths every year as a result of gun control, according to Peters.

And, oh yes, hunters continue to hunt, and target shooters continue to plink. No armies of jack booted police have stormed private residences to seize weapons.

Australia’s stringent gun control laws aren’t likely to be adopted in the U.S. anytime soon. But we can learn something from their political organizing.

Today, the NRA stops even the smallest gun reforms from passing the U.S Congress. But other, seemingly undefeatable lobbies nave been weakened. Look at Big Tobacco and the right-wing Cuba Lobby. The NRA could be next.

Today the NRA faces a formidable enemy. The Parkland high school students have sparked grass-roots efforts among other students and their parents. They’ve sat in at the Florida state house and in the U.S. Senate.

Peters said grass roots organizing defeated the gun lobby in Australia and it can be done in the US as well. “The NRA uses power of intimidation,” she said. “And they often win the public relations war. But they can be defeated.”

Reese Erlich’s syndicated column “Foreign Correspondent” appears every two weeks in 48 Hills. The revised edition of his book ‘The Iran Agenda: the Real Story of US and Policy and the Mideast Crisis,’ will be published in 2018. His home page is www.reeseerlich.com; follow him on Twitter @ReeseErlich or on Facebook, Reese Erlich foreign correspondent.

Reprinted with author’s permission from 48Hills.org

Posted in Guns | 7 Responses | Print |

7 Responses

  1. The NRA is under investigation for using Russian-supplied money in the 2016 election in support of Trump, in violation of campaign finance and other laws. Perhaps the organization finally went too far? How popular would the National Rifle Association be, if it were proven that they have been collusing with US enemy Russia? Particularly with all the anti-communist, anti-socialist rhetoric NRA folks have been spouting lately?

    • Russia is now considered right-wing… by everybody except for some reason the far left in America. Putin is a flat-taxing Moslem-bombing homophobe who has taken capitalism to its logical conclusion; one-man rule of both capital and state. He’s the new Czar.

      So the NRA folks, the alt-Right and other White Christian supremacists are coming around to the idea that Putin is the White Knight who will save Euro-American civilization from democracy and globalization.

  2. I think because we can’t get all these Australian measures passed in the US, we need to prove how much effect each one had and try to get in the one that had the most impact. That overcomes the cynicism standing in the way of further measures.

  3. OK but not all is great with gun control in Australia.
    Some mistakes were made in Australia.
    Gun buyers have to get training at gun clubs so gun or shooting clubs have grown and amassed memberships and money and now are flexing some political muscle or trying to through political parties
    Recently the NRA from the good ole USA has turned up with lobbying money.
    Also state governments are busy watering down the federal law/guidelines in response (see recently Tasmanian election)

  4. There is an elephant in the room which even gun control advocates in the US just can’t seem to see.

    In almost every other country in the world, it is not permitted for ordinary citizens to use deadly force in self-defense as a matter of course. As a result, you cannot get a license to keep a gun unless you have a valid reason. In the UK that means vermin control, hunting or target shooting.

    Because citizens are forbidden from shooting other citizens, there is no valid reason to keep a handgun at home, let alone carry one outside the house. And it is handguns rather than long guns which account for the vast majority of homicides in the USA.

    In fact, in many European countries, in rural areas one frequently sees people carrying shotguns and rifles – every one of which is registered and every owner is subjected to rigorous police checks and monitoring. But even more importantly, the owners of those guns do not see their guns as weapons to be used against other humans – they are either tools of trade or sporting equipment.

    Tinkering with the laws on bump stocks and assault rifles is missing the point. For any fundamental change to happen, Americans need to be willing to give up their god-given right to kill their fellow Americans. Which seems pretty unlikely…

    • “There is an elephant in the room which even gun control advocates in the US just can’t seem to see.” The real “elephant” IS these folks will absolutely not give up their guns for any reason without a fight which could include violent insurrection in some regions of the U.S.

  5. You’ve hit on a very important point. NRA crypto-militia arguments praising Switzerland as a libertarian gun-ownership paradise completely ignore the difference between our gun culture and theirs. Swissmen keep government guns in their houses out of a tradition of resisting invading foreign armies under the direction of that government. They don’t imagine that these heavy weapons are meant to be used against their countrymen, carried around all the time to shoot anyone who looks suspicious, displayed on the streets to intimidate minorities.

    America is another matter. And at some point in the past, Yugoslavia, which also had a localized militia system, became another matter.

Comments are closed.