Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will convene the national cabinet today with a promise to introduce tougher guns laws after the Bondi terrorist attack — including ownership limits and a review of existing licences.
“The government is prepared to take whatever action is necessary,” he said.
“Included in that is the need for tougher laws, and this afternoon at 4 o’clock I will put it on the agenda of the National Cabinet.”
However, he made a number of factual errors in his statement, adding to fears from law-abiding gun owners that knee-jerk changes to existing guns laws will be punitive, ill conceived and ultimately ineffective, all at the expense of fairness for firearms owners.
Albanese was right when he said the Bondi Beach attack was “an act of pure evil” but he is wrong to think that a sudden change in gun laws will tackle future terrorism.
He forecast “tougher gun laws including limits on the number of guns that can be used or licensed by individuals”.
There is no evidence that owning any number of firearms increases danger to the public; indeed, the Bondi terrorists did not use a large arsenal of weapons. Ownership limits as a public safety benefit are a furphy.
Mr Albanese also mooted “a review of licences over a period of time”.
“People’s circumstances change,” he said. “People can be radicalised over a period of time. Licences should not be in perpetuity.”
No Australian holds a firearms licence in perpetuity, but must re-apply every five years or sooner.
Police already have the power to revoke a licence on the spot if they deem someone not to be a fit and proper person to hold it.
This naturally applies where someone has been radicalised.
“And checks, of course,” Mr Albanese added, “making sure that those checks and balances are in place as well.”
Check are already in place. At least one of the Bondi attackers had already been investigated by ASIO for his links to terrorist group Islamic State, yet Australia’s security organisations and police had apparently allowed him to retain a firearms licence.
Mr Albanese hinted at having his own John Howard moment in the wake of the mass shooting.
“Quite clearly the Howard Government’s gun laws have made an enormous difference in Australia and a proud moment of reform — quite rightly — was achieved across the parliament with bipartisan support.
“If we need to toughen these up, if there’s anything we can do, I’m certainly up for it and I hope to get National Cabinet on board for that this afternoon as well.”
At a fundamental level, Australian police want to disarm the population, as they consider civilian-owned firearms to be a danger to them.
Politicians tend to listen to police recommendations on tougher laws of all kinds, and it takes a certain level of resistance from politicians to avoid the police gaining too much sway in any matter.
Look at what happened in WA through its introduction of new gun laws – drafted by police and championed by a police minister.
We already have Queensland’s Labor opposition suggesting WA-style gun laws should be introduced there.
Having a Prime Minister reacting so quickly, with a clear lack of practical knowledge of current gun laws, is a genuine concern for the entire country.
Howard’s supposedly gold-standard gun laws didn’t stop this mass shooting and tougher laws still won’t stop another when we are talking about acts of terrorism, which stem from far deeper and darker recesses of the human psyche than any law can prevent.
And we know from other mass killings in Australia and overseas that knives, trucks, bombs, fires, gas and other weapons can and will be utilised.
The Bondi attack was not a failure of gun laws. It was a failure of policing, a failure of the intelligence community and a failure of political leadership.
Dozens of innocent people paid the price of that at Bondi Beach.
Sometime after 4pm today, law-abiding Australian firearm owners will be the ones punished for it.
Our immediate reaction must be to write to our local MPs and urge them not to allow the governments — states, territories and Commonwealth — to make a knee-jerk reaction, and to fully, properly assess the right way to deal with a problem that is far bigger than our gun laws.
0 Comments