Gun Control In Australia Essay
People say that although the gun control efforts are for a good cause, they would not have much of an impact on the gun violence rate (Goldberg 2). They’re wrong.On the 28th of April 1996, 28 year old Martin Bryant opened fire in Port Arthur, Tasmania in Australia. He killed thirty-five people and injured twenty-four. This was the worst massacre in Australian history. Twelve days later, the Australian government, led by Prime Minister John Howard, announced new gun policies for both state and local governments to enact. It started with a massive mandatory buyback of over 650,000 to one million semi-automatic shotguns and rifles (Mehta 2). The new gun laws also prohibited private sales and required that all weapons be registered individually
…show more content…
“Self-defense” did not count as a genuine reason and polls showed that 90% of respondents were supportive of the new measures (Mehta 5). Although gun violence and deaths did not come to an end in Australia, as predicted, studies by Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University show that the homicide due to firearms rate when down 59% between 1995 and 2006 (Bowers 4). Suicides due to firearms dropped steeper at 65%. Robberies involving firearms decreased significantly and home invasions did not increase (Mehta . Contrary to the belief that firearms are needed to stop gun violence, the most stunning statistic from this is that in the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, eleven other mass shootings took place. After these new laws were implemented in Australia, there has not been a mass shooting defined as the gunman killing five or more people beside himself there since (Bowers 5). The United States government has debated this every time after a mass shooting. Those for gun control always mention Australia’s approach, but those who are against say it wouldn’t work. Cities in Florida, Connecticut, California, and Arkansas have all experimented with a buyback, but usually, the illegal guns or firearms which were confiscated by the police are just sold
“Self-defense” did not count as a genuine reason and polls showed that 90% of respondents were supportive of the new measures (Mehta 5). Although gun violence and deaths did not come to an end in Australia, as predicted, studies by Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University show that the homicide due to firearms rate when down 59% between 1995 and 2006 (Bowers 4). Suicides due to firearms dropped steeper at 65%. Robberies involving firearms decreased significantly and home invasions did not increase (Mehta . Contrary to the belief that firearms are needed to stop gun violence, the most stunning statistic from this is that in the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, eleven other mass shootings took place. After these new laws were implemented in Australia, there has not been a mass shooting defined as the gunman killing five or more people beside himself there since (Bowers 5). The United States government has debated this every time after a mass shooting. Those for gun control always mention Australia’s approach, but those who are against say it wouldn’t work. Cities in Florida, Connecticut, California, and Arkansas have all experimented with a buyback, but usually, the illegal guns or firearms which were confiscated by the police are just sold