Australia Reveals Gun Control Truths
TL;DR, it doesn't work.
How Australia’s Gun Laws Failed:
Australia’s Gun Rules Explained:
As I’m sure you’ve heard, the “terrible thing that only happens in the United States” happened in Australia. Many were quick to praise their draconian gun prohibitions as “still necessary” while data from Australia’s government indicates otherwise.
Australia has indeed enjoyed a low homicide rate for decades since enacting its gun bans in 1996-1997; however, there are several problems with attributing this to these laws.
If Australian gun policy was the cause of their declining homicide rate, how did that decline begin almost a decade before those bans were enacted?
If Australian gun policy was the cause of their declining homicide rate, why did that decline also include homicides not involving firearms?
If Australian gun policy was the cause of their declining homicide rate, why did the United States experience a nearly identical decline during the same time period?
The reason I’m certain you’ve heard of the shooting at Bondi Beach is because of the massive international attention it received. Perceptions of guns being uniquely dangerous are a product of reporting, not reality. This phenomenon has been formally studied even as most people remain unaware.
Meanwhile, more common occurrences that are statistically deadlier don’t even register. One example, the CDC - an organization that has declared firearms as a “public health crisis” - recognizes on its website that choking to death while eating kills 12 times more people than those killed with rifles every year - AR-15 or otherwise. Also, twice as many people are killed by being punched or kicked to death.
The CDC also recognizes traveling by motor vehicle as one of the most dangerous activities most people engage in, but has yet to declare it a public health crisis.
“But we need cars” is a common retort. Do we need kids to die playing school sports? Still waiting for the CDC to declare this a public health crisis.
Guns are “bad” because too many people are ignorant about them. Rare events are amplified and perceived as having an outsized danger, while common dangers are ignored. Most military personnel are novices with firearms, and people still misperceive them as “experts” because they don’t know any better. Add in reporting bias and fearmongering, particularly when it’s tax-deductible for a small number of wealthy donors, and you’ll have pearl-clutching voters who have never held a real firearm trying to inflict their uninformed opinion as government-enforced, taxpayer-funded policy.
Great post. As a retired LEO with 50 years combined local and state service I have seen the failure of gun control both on the street, and among officer killed incidents. Of all my fellow officers slain on my city department service, ALL were killed using illegally obtained guns, and ALL used by persons prohibited from even touching a firearm. One was murdered on-duty by a crackhead felon paroled by my state board for a prior murder.
Gun Control, "gun safety" laws and reasonable gun regulation are pointless and contrary to the US Constitution; and leave unarmed citizens as sheep before the wolves of criminals and oppressive government. Thinking citizens need to understand and acknowledge that salient fact.
As usual firearms prohibition works both ways. The victims of the beach attack were unarmed. The very laws ment to protect them caused them to be vulnerable. It simply comes down to politicians who don’t trust the people to defend themselves from criminals and government overreach.