Welcome back to Trigger Happy: Gun Control in the United States. Last week, we looked at the sides of this debate, and how each one stands. This week, we will be moving onto a new chapter.
Towards the end of last week's post, I briefly brought up how Australia handled their gun violence issue. And for those who don't see America has having these issues, look at this chart that shows exactly how big of a problem gun violence is:
This can be directly related to gun ownership, as shown by this:
In my next post, I will delve more deeper into how our nation is effected, but first, I would like to address how other world leaders have dealt (successfully) which this issue in their own countries.
Australia
I've chosen to talk about Australia first because they have a shocking success rate with their solutions. Following the massacre in Australia on April 28th 1996, in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, John Howard, the Prime Minister at the time, decided to take radical action. This killing spree, which is still considered one of the deadliest shootings worldwide by a single person, was committed by 28 year old Martian Bryant, who shot 57 people; injuring 23 and killing 35. After this horrific event, Howard made swift moves to make sure this didn't happen again. That same year, he implemented the National Firearms Programme Implementation Act 1996.
This act is very complex, but at the center of it was a buyback of more than 600,000
semi-automatic shotguns and rifles, or about one-fifth of all firearms
in circulation in Australia. New laws were put in place to prohibit
private sales of firearms, instead it required that all weapons be individually registered to
their owners, and required that gun buyers present a “genuine reason”
for needing each weapon. This "genuine reason" does not include self-defense.
Although they may seem like radical steps, public support for these measures above 90%, mostly because people were still in the wake of the tragedy. And it worked. Big time. Homicides by firearms decreased 59% from 1996 to 2005. There was a 65% drop in suicide by guns. Interestingly, home invasions did not increase at all. This is interesting because a main argument of anti-gun law activists use the reasoning that they need to protect their homes. Coupled with the drop in robberies involving guns, this reason seems to put itself away nicely. One of the most amazing things from these policies is that since they were put into place a decade ago, there hasn't been one mass shooting in Australia.
Germany
The second country I want to bring up is Germany, because they have one of the strictest gun control policies in the world. The current law is the German Weapons Act (Waffengesetz) which was installed in 1972; it is a modification to previous gun laws. These laws regulate firearms, knives, and ammunition. They have strict rules about how to purchase guns, how to store them, and how to maintain them. They also ban the possession and distribution of 'forbidden items' such as nunchacks, switchblades and brass knuckles.
The history of their gun laws goes all the way back to 1495, with German Emperor Maximilian I. Called the Ewiger Landfriede, this ruling put an 'everlasting ban' on vandettas (private feuds) which seems kind of weird. Basically, people were only allowed to fight within the court of law. After that, there was the better known Treaty of Versailles in 1919 (post WWII). Loosely, this limited the German military's firearms. After that was the gun regulation of the Third Reich in 1928. Briefly, these laws set by the Nazi regime lowered the age to buy a gun from 20 to 18, the validity of permits were expanded from one to three years, and Jewish people were not allowed to manufacture or distribute firearms or ammo.
There are no amendments in the German legal tradition that allude to a right to bear arms, however, given their sticky past, gun laws are supported by many people. Currently, in order to buy a gun, anyone under the ago of 25 must undergo a physiological evaluation. Like Australia, one must have an adequate reason for buying the gun (hunter, competitive shooter, ect.), and there is a ban on fully automatic weapons. Liability insurance is required for anyone who is licensed to carry firearms.
A new Weapons Act became effective in 2003 after a school shooting in the city of Erfurt in which a student killed sixteen people. The new Act restricted the use of large caliber weapons by young people and strengthened requirements for the safe storage of firearms. Then, after a massacre at Winnenden, in which an eighteen-year-old killed fifteen people in a school shooting, further restrictions were made; this time, the authorities may request access to see a registered gun in order to monitor whether proper safe-storage procedures are being upheld.
Like in Australia, their rates of violence involving firearms has decreased. They saw they had a problem, and they took swift steps to ensure it wouldn't happen again.
Why, then, aren't these ideals taking hold in the U.S.? In my next post, I will go further into that question, delving into America's troubles gun situation and why it is so hard to resolve.
Towards the end of last week's post, I briefly brought up how Australia handled their gun violence issue. And for those who don't see America has having these issues, look at this chart that shows exactly how big of a problem gun violence is:
 |
| Via Washington Post |
 |
| Numbers correlate to amount of guns, Via Voxdotcom |
In my next post, I will delve more deeper into how our nation is effected, but first, I would like to address how other world leaders have dealt (successfully) which this issue in their own countries.
Australia
I've chosen to talk about Australia first because they have a shocking success rate with their solutions. Following the massacre in Australia on April 28th 1996, in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, John Howard, the Prime Minister at the time, decided to take radical action. This killing spree, which is still considered one of the deadliest shootings worldwide by a single person, was committed by 28 year old Martian Bryant, who shot 57 people; injuring 23 and killing 35. After this horrific event, Howard made swift moves to make sure this didn't happen again. That same year, he implemented the National Firearms Programme Implementation Act 1996.
 |
| John Howard, via Topnews |
Although they may seem like radical steps, public support for these measures above 90%, mostly because people were still in the wake of the tragedy. And it worked. Big time. Homicides by firearms decreased 59% from 1996 to 2005. There was a 65% drop in suicide by guns. Interestingly, home invasions did not increase at all. This is interesting because a main argument of anti-gun law activists use the reasoning that they need to protect their homes. Coupled with the drop in robberies involving guns, this reason seems to put itself away nicely. One of the most amazing things from these policies is that since they were put into place a decade ago, there hasn't been one mass shooting in Australia.
Germany
The second country I want to bring up is Germany, because they have one of the strictest gun control policies in the world. The current law is the German Weapons Act (Waffengesetz) which was installed in 1972; it is a modification to previous gun laws. These laws regulate firearms, knives, and ammunition. They have strict rules about how to purchase guns, how to store them, and how to maintain them. They also ban the possession and distribution of 'forbidden items' such as nunchacks, switchblades and brass knuckles.
The history of their gun laws goes all the way back to 1495, with German Emperor Maximilian I. Called the Ewiger Landfriede, this ruling put an 'everlasting ban' on vandettas (private feuds) which seems kind of weird. Basically, people were only allowed to fight within the court of law. After that, there was the better known Treaty of Versailles in 1919 (post WWII). Loosely, this limited the German military's firearms. After that was the gun regulation of the Third Reich in 1928. Briefly, these laws set by the Nazi regime lowered the age to buy a gun from 20 to 18, the validity of permits were expanded from one to three years, and Jewish people were not allowed to manufacture or distribute firearms or ammo.
There are no amendments in the German legal tradition that allude to a right to bear arms, however, given their sticky past, gun laws are supported by many people. Currently, in order to buy a gun, anyone under the ago of 25 must undergo a physiological evaluation. Like Australia, one must have an adequate reason for buying the gun (hunter, competitive shooter, ect.), and there is a ban on fully automatic weapons. Liability insurance is required for anyone who is licensed to carry firearms.
A new Weapons Act became effective in 2003 after a school shooting in the city of Erfurt in which a student killed sixteen people. The new Act restricted the use of large caliber weapons by young people and strengthened requirements for the safe storage of firearms. Then, after a massacre at Winnenden, in which an eighteen-year-old killed fifteen people in a school shooting, further restrictions were made; this time, the authorities may request access to see a registered gun in order to monitor whether proper safe-storage procedures are being upheld.
Like in Australia, their rates of violence involving firearms has decreased. They saw they had a problem, and they took swift steps to ensure it wouldn't happen again.
Why, then, aren't these ideals taking hold in the U.S.? In my next post, I will go further into that question, delving into America's troubles gun situation and why it is so hard to resolve.
