Australia has seen less gun-related incidents and has been a safer place since the execution of new, safer gun laws. The recent claims made by Australian Shooting academy are nothing short of ludicrous. Australia does not require more lenient gun laws, do we really need to reward potential killers with easy access to guns and ammunition?.
The Port Arthur massacre of April 1996 provoked new laws and the destruction of 600,000 guns, in order to protect society from itself. Due to the gun control laws Australia has seen a dramatic decrease in Homicide and suicide rates. The controlled access to guns, gun licences and ammunition has seen Australia become a country with one of the lowest rates of gun related incidents. So why does the ACA wish to change that and destroy the successful gun control laws? Perhaps it is because they want to defend the pore, defenceless taxpayer who gets the bill for the implementation of these laws? Well, the average Australian taxpayer is a little more concerned with the safety of themselves and their family rather than the easy access they could have to firearms in which potential criminals would also gain.
A study has found that before Australia's gun control laws were implemented (before Port Arthur) about 10% of the population were gun owners, averaging 2 guns each, and that 26% of households had one or more guns. At that time, 40% of murders involved guns. These statistics have now been reduced significantly and the overall violent crime rate involving firearms has decreased dramatically. .
Surely, the ACA can't really believe that Australians will accept the suggestion that concealed handgun laws should be modified because they reduce violent crimes? "They reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves".
