Just days after the Bondi terror attacks, the Prime Minister launched an attack on law abiding gun owners. He blamed the attacks on guns without mentioning the radical Islamic ideology that was clearly the main culprit in these horrific attacks.
Ever since, the PM has used the attacks to try to further regulate the use of guns even on people, farmers and recreational shooters who have done nothing wrong. Last week the Government released new restrictions on gun ownership in a proposedbill.
Part of Labor’s gun law “reforms” were to strengthen the oversight of the importation of “gel blasters” used in skirmish activities. I cannot find a single instance of a fatality using skirmish equipment. Why then were these restrictions in the Bill?
The cynic in me thinks that instead of being a response to the tragic attacks at Bondi, these “reforms” have been pulled out of a bottom drawer in Canberra written by people that want to crack down on guns anyway.
How else do you explain the stuff up of the original Bill banning the importation of vests that could carry more than 30 rounds. As became clear in the inadequate three days the Government gave for feedback on the Bill, this restriction would have preventedAustralian athletes from competing at Olympic shooting events. Fortunately, the Government removed this provision at the last minute.
But it raised questions about how poorly this Bill had been thought through. The Government is seeking to restrict the import of lever action firearms even though these are often essential for farmers to conduct pest control.
The Government is establishing a gun buyback scheme that State governments have not signed on to, and the Queensland Government has said that it will not participate in. Unlike the original buyback scheme after the Port Arthur massacre, this scheme does not compensate people for ammunition or gun accessories.
Much was made of the fact that there are more guns in Australia now than before the Port Arthur attacks. But the people raising this point would ignore that there are more people in Australia now too. Before Port Arthur, there were 18 guns for every 100 Australians. Now, there is 15.
While this Bill was being rushed through the Parliament, politicians gave lots of speeches imploring the need for unity post-Bondi. Almost in the next sentence they would pivot to start railing against the evil of gun owners. So much for unity.
I do not own guns but I enjoy going clay target shooting at the range when I have the chance. Why do we want to stop law abiding Australians from having fun? Or even worse, stop people doing their jobs as farmers or pest controllers?
We need to stop demonising other Australians just because we have different tastes or recreational pursuits. A free country means respecting the choices of other people providing they are doing so in a lawful way.
The demonisation of lawful gun owners has clearly been used as a distraction from the more difficult conversation about what we do about people that want to bring overseas conflicts to our shores in a violent fashion. Ever since the horror of October 7, the Labor Government has turned a blind eye when protestors have called to “gas the Jews” or shouted “death to the IDF”.
Once again, our Government is seeking to distract from the real issue because it seems unwilling and unable to tackle the violent rhetoric from some of its own supporters. Instead, it will target gun owners who would not often vote for Labor.
It is the complete opposite to how John Howard handled Port Arthur. He took on his own voters at much political risk. We are all losers from the lack of political leadership shown today.
