Australia no safer with gun buyback: study
October 24, 2006
The introduction of
Australia's tough new gun laws in 1996 has done little to reduce the
rate of gun murder or suicide.
The new laws - which were accompanied by a $500 million buyback of more
than 600,000 guns - came after the Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania,
where 35 people were gunned down.
A study, prepared by Australian pro-gun lobbyists and published in the
British Journal of Criminology, argues that the money spent on the
buyback would have been better spent on a public health campaign.
The laws were introduced by Prime Minister John Howard and banned
self-loading rifles as well self-loading and pump-action shotguns and
gave owners a 12-month amnesty to hand in weapons and receive
compensation.
But the paper, written by Jeanine Baker - from the Sporting Shooters
Association of Australia and Samara McPhedran from the International
Coalition for Women in Shooting and Hunting - argues that Australia is
no safer because of the buyback.
The authors say that early intervention programs would have been more
effective at reducing gun deaths.
"In 1996 we were told that buying back those civilian firearms off
licensed firearm owners would make society safer and would reduce
firearm deaths. The evidence isn't there to support that," Jeanine
Barker said.
While the study relies on the premise that mass shootings precipitated
the policy change, nowhere does it mention that since Port Arthur,
Australia has not seen any mass gun murders.
But Ms Baker says the study looked at overall gun deaths and the
national firearms agreement.
"In terms of mass murder, there has been mass murder since Port Arthur,
they haven't been with a firearm," she said.
She says that when it comes to suicide deaths, governments in Australia
have pursued the wrong policies.
"If the money spent on gun control in 1996 had been spent on suicide
prevention programs or mental health programs we would have saved a lot
more lives," she said.
Professor of Public Health at the University of Sydney and anti-gun
advocate, Simon Chapman, says the research should not be taken seriously
because it does not address the specific reason for the introduction of
the laws - that is, the incidence of mass gun murders in Australia.
"John Howard introduced these new gun laws as a specific response to the
Port Arthur massacre and to the 11 massacres which had occurred in the
10 years before that where 100 people died," Professor Chapman said.
He says the gun laws on hand guns still need some tightening up.
"There's been a proliferation of hand guns in recent years, but I think
generally speaking that the gun law situation in Australia remains one
of the toughest in the world and that's to the great disappointment of
the gun lobby in Australia and internationally."