Are Australia's new gun laws appropriate?
Echo Issue Outline 1997 / 28: copyright © Echo Education Services
First published in The Echo news digest and newspaper sources index.
Issue outline by J M McInerney
What they said
`... the overarching international reality ... is that the more guns [a country] has , and the looser the control of them, the more deaths that country will suffer'
The Australian, editorial, May 11, 1996
`... the Dunblane murderer ... could easily have achieved his deranged ends by other means, such as a flame accelerant'
Mr Sebastian Ziccone, Victorian president of the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia
The killing of 35 people at Port Arthur, Tasmania, on April 28, 1996, led to immediate calls for rigorous national gun laws. Those killed were shot by a single gun man using semi-automatic weapons.
On May 10, after a summit with the police ministers of all states and territories, the prime minister, Mr John Howard, announced a ten point scheme, the key element of which was a ban on all automatic and semi-automatic weapons.
This proposal met with immediate opposition from the gun lobby, including the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia. It was also initially unfavourably received by sections of the National Party and some state premiers doubted their ability to enforce it..
Background
The impetus for the prime minister's proposal was the mass murder at Port Arthur. The national grief and outrage following this tragedy led to wide-ranging, bi-partisan (across all political parties) support for gun law reform.
While some states, such as Victoria, already had quite rigorous gun laws in place, other states, such as Tasmania, did not.
The agreement reached on May 10, 1996, included the following provisions.
* It is illegal to import, own, sell, resell, transfer, possess, manufacture or use any automatic, pump action or semi-automatic weapon.
* An exception has made for some primary producers who will able to use low-powered semi-automatics if they can demonstrate to the police that they need them for a purpose that could not be adequately met by a single action weapon.
* With police approval farmers can be licensed to use a semi-automatic weapon for a twelve month period, after which licences must be reviewed before renewal.
* `Fair and proper' compensation is to be paid to all gun owners required to surrender their now banned weapons. It has been decided to fund this buyback through a special Medicare levy which will raise some $500 million.
* All legal firearms are to be registered as part of an integrated licensing system. The register will be linked nationally.
* There will be a common approach to licensing and only those who can demonstrate they are fit and proper people with a genuine reason for owning a gun will be licensed.
* There will be stringent storage requirements and first-time licence applicants will have to complete compulsory safety training .
* There will be tight controls on the sale or transfer of guns and ammunition within and between states and territories.
A number of lobby groups have presented their positions in the debate over the new laws. Some of these groups have Internet home pages. The major group supporting the new gun laws is the Coalition for Gun Control. The major group opposing the new gun laws is the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia.
Arguments in favour of Australia's new gun laws.
One of the main arguments put forward to support the banning of semi-automatic and pump action rifles is that this is likely to reduce the number of people killed and injured by these weapons. Semi-automatic and pump action weapons are claimed to be particularly destructive because they fire large amounts of ammunition rapidly without the need for reloading and so allow the shooter to do a great deal of damage in a short time.
It has further been claimed that guns play a significant role in increasing the murder rate in any country where they are available. According to this line of argument, homicide is not just about the inclination to kill another person, it is also about having the means to do so. Those who oppose guns being in private hands claim that they are dangerous because they are a simple and effective means of killing. It is also noted that guns contribute significantly to the rate of accidental death and suicide.
The Australian Medical Association has claimed, `Reducing access to easy means of suicide has been shown to substantially reduce the overall death rate.' While The Australian, in its editorial of May 11, 1996, noted, `... the overarching international reality ... is that the more guns [a country] has , and the looser the control of them, the more deaths that country will suffer.'
The Australian editorial then went on to compare gun-related deaths in Australia with those in Britain which, prior to Australia's recent gun law reform, had stricter gun controls. In 1995, Britain, with a population of 57 million, had 70 gun-related deaths, while Australia, with a population of 18 million, had 522.
It has also been noted that guns do not appear to increase the security of home owners as those most likely to be killed or injured by weapons in private homes are the owners and their families.
Many of those who support the new laws concede that they will not be totally successful in removing these weapons from the community and so will not completely prevent their misuse, however, they argue, the ban should increase the level of public safety. Supporters of outlawing these types of gun have noted that crimes involving them have decreased in states which have introduced stricter gun controls.
Supporters of national, uniform legislation claim that this is necessary to help prevent the spread of weapons across the country from states with less rigorous legislation.
This point was made in The Age in its editorial of May 5, 1996. The editorial claimed, `... uniform laws and strict enforcement are necessary to prevent such gun-happy states as Tasmania and Queensland from subverting effective controls through lax standards.'
It has also been noted that the current legislation treats gun owners fairly in that they are being compensated for the weapons they surrender, while farmers who can demonstrate a genuine need to use a semi-automatic weapon will be able to do so subject to police approval.
It has been argued that those who enjoy shooting as a sport will not be prevented from doing so as single action weapons are still legal. This also means that farmers will have single action weapons available to destroy vermin or suffering livestock.
Overall, opponents of widespread gun ownership, especially of automatic and semi-automatic weapons, argue that gun ownership is not a right but a privilege that should only be extended to those which a demonstrated need and competence.
It has been noted that unlike the United States Australia has no constitutional provisions that can be seen as guaranteeing a right of its citizens to carry arms.
Finally, it has been claimed, that in a democracy the will of the majority should prevail. Supporters of the new laws note that all surveys taken indicate a massive overall support for stricter gun laws, though there are some country regions which do not reflect this trend.
Thus, the prime minister, Mr Howard was able to urge the various state premiers who were doubtful about the new proposed legislation to accept it by threatening to hold a referendum on the issue.
Arguments against Australia's new gun laws
There are two sets of argument offered against Australia's new gun laws. The first set come from those who want to retain automatic or semi-automatic weapons. The second come from those who believe the ban should have gone further and who want all guns removed from the general community.
The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (SSAA) and other members of the gun lobby claim that the vast majority of gun owners are guilty of no offence. Ted Drane, the national president of the SSAA has claimed that he and all law-abiding owners of semi-automatic and pump action weapons are being penalised for the actions of a single unstable individual.
Many opponents of Australia's new gun laws claim there is no relationship between lawful gun ownership and gun crime.
Sebastian Ziccone, the Victorian president of the SSAA, has claimed that World Health Organisation figures demonstrate no connection between the legal possession of guns and the use of guns to commit offences. Mr Ziccone has cited the low murder rate in Switzerland which allows private people to own fully automatic and semi-automatic weapons.
Mr Ziccone has also claimed that banning pump action and semi-automatic weapons will have no impact on Australia's murder rate as potential murderers will simply use another weapon. According to this line of argument, the crucial element in any murder situation is the person who commits the crime, not the weapon they use to do so.
Mr Ziccone has referred to the Dunblane killings which occurred despite Britain's rigorous anti-gun laws. Mr Ziccone claims, `... the Dunblane murderer ... could easily have achieved his deranged ends by other means, such as a flame accelerant.'
Opponents of Australia's new laws also claim that prohibition will not succeed in getting all pump action and semi-automatic weapons out of private hands.
Mr Ross Finocchiaro, in a letter published in The Australian on May 16, 1996, has noted, `Only those firearms that are on a police firearms register somewhere will be collected. There is simply no way of knowing where the rest are. In New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania ... there are no effective registers ...'
Mr Ziccone also argues that the experience in other countries indicates that all prohibition does is force many weapons owners to gain and keep their weapons secretly and illegally. Mr Ziccone gives the example of China, where he claims millions of guns are sold on the black market annually.
Critics of the new legislation claim that purchasing guns on the black market makes gun ownership more dangerous as it is unregulated, unrecorded and there is no enforceable requirement that the gun owner be competent.
It has also been suggested that the compensation paid to gun owners who surrender their weapons is likely to be inadequate as it will not include payment for the additional equipment that goes to support shooting as a hobby and will also not compensate gunsmiths for their loss of income.
One gun maker who was about to begin exporting the weapons he produces has claimed that the new regulations could cost at least 10 jobs in his business alone.
Opponents of weapons restrictions further claim that what is required is not a total ban on automatic and semi-automatic weapons, but stricter control on the sale of weapons so that they do not get into the hands of the mentally unstable.
The second set of opponents of Australia's new gun laws have claimed that they do not go far enough. The Australian Medical Association was initially disappointed that the ban was not imposed on all firearms while some of the relatives of those killed at Port Arthur expressed a similar concern.
Those who support a total ban are concerned by the fact that a number of gun dealers have reported that people who have surrendered illegal firearms and been compensated are using that money to buy legal weapons. The claim has been made that the end result will be the same number of firearms in the community, and the only gain will have been that many of them will be of a less powerful type.
Further implications
It is not certain what the total impact of the new legislation and the federally funded buyback scheme will be. By the end of 1996 all states and territories had passed legislation in accord with the national gun laws proposed to and agreed upon by all premiers in July, 1996.
The buyback scheme will expire on September 30, 1997, in all states and territories except South Australia where the scheme will extend to the end of the year. The buyback scheme gives immunity to those surrendering unregistered weapons.
As of November, 1996, a total of 148,498 firearms had been surrendered and compensation of over $68 million had been paid.
The Commonwealth Law Enforcement Board has cited research suggesting some two-thirds of gun owners were likely to surrender their weapons, however, all such figures can only be estimates.
All that can be said with certainty is that the number of semi-automatic and automatic weapons in the community has been significantly reduced.
Supporters of the new gun laws also hope that a blow may have been struck against Australia developing the sort of gun culture that exists in America.
It remains to be seen whether some indignant gun owners punish their political representatives electorally. There have been suggestions that a gun lobby protest vote could tell against some National Party senators.
Sources
The Age
5/5/96 page 18 editorial, `Port Arthur: we must ensure they did not die in vain'
8//5/96 page 15 comment by Martin Flanagan, `Why the gun lobby's rhetoric misses its mark'
10/5//96 page 15 comment by Sebastian Ziccone, `In defence of arms'
7/6/96 page 11 opinions for and against gun control, `Gun control'
26/8/96 page 2 news item by Gabrielle Costa, `Thousands of guns go into crusher'
29/8/96 page 3 news item by Karen Middleton, `States get extra cash for gun scheme'
31/7/96 page 7 news item by Jason Koutsoukis, `Gun laws to begin 1 October'
14/10/96 page 5 news item by Jason Koutsoukis, `Buy-back scheme brings surge in demand for legal firearms'
The Australian
11/5/96 page 4 news item by Claire Harvey, `Doctors disappointed at lack of total ban'
11/5/96 page 4 news item by Dennis Shanahan, `No blanket access for farmers'
11/5/96 page 20 editorial, `Historic pact on gun reforms'
16/5/96 page 12 letter to the editor by Ross Finocchiardo, `Invisible guns with those who were too canny to register'
8/11/96 page 13 analysis by Stephen Lunn, `Is the buyback working?'
The Herald Sun
11/5/96 page 2 `Statement by Prime Minister John Howard'
11/5/96 page 3 news item by Michael Harvey, `Historic deal for buyback'
11/5/96 page 3 news item, `Relatives want tougher laws'
30/5/96 page 19 comment by Tim Costello, `The four lies of the gun lobby'
5/6/96 page 19 comment by Sebastian Ziccone, `Why we are so angry'
5/11/96 page 5 news item by Craig Binnie, `Victorian gun laws save lives'
The Internet
The home page for the Coalition for Gun Control can be found at http://www.health.su.oz.au/cgc/ This page gives you a number of useful click-throughs including one to a detailed analysis of the new laws and another to a summary of the debate for and against.
The home page for the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia can be found at http://www.ssaa.org.au/ This page has click-throughs to Australian and international firearms links and to extracts from the Association's monthly journal. It also links to a statement of the Association's aims and objectives.