Firearm Control - Assessing the Impact
by Paul Peake
Australian Shooters Journal
September 1998
Anyone who has written to their local MP over the past two years complaining about the treatment of law-abiding shooters under the Howard government's "buyback" confiscation program would be familiar with the list of standard replies. One statement consistently offered up by politicians to justify the seizure of hundreds of thousands of pieces of private property is the now familiar mantra, "Australia will be a safer place". Newly released figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show, however, that despite the forced surrender of over 640,000 lawfully owned firearms and the outlay of $500,000,000, Australia is a long way from being a safer place and in many ways it has grown more dangerous.
The figures are contained in the Australian Bureau of Statistics publication Recorded Crime (1), which reviews the rate of reported incidents across a broad range of offences. The data indicate that between 1996 and 1997, serious crime increased considerably in Australia. Murder rose by 3.2%; assaults increased by 8.6%; armed robbery grew by a frightening 44%; unarmed robbery increased by 21%; unlawful entry with intent, including both (UEWI) involving the taking of property and (UEWI) 'other', rose by 3.9%, while motor vehicle theft increased by 6.1%.
Table 1 indicates the total number of crimes committed across a range of categories. The rise in the number of murders is particularly significant, bearing in mind that the increase took place at the same time as the Federal Government was forcibly appropriating people's firearms, premised on the argument that it would lead to a 'safer community' - the increase becomes even more dramatic if one allows for the 35 murders in one incident in 1996.
Similarly, the enormous increase in the number of both armed and unarmed robberies raises some serious doubts about the government's claims. According to the ABS data, armed robbery underwent the most significant increase of any category of crime in 1997. Table 2 shows how the trend has been steadily growing for some time.
The confiscation of hundreds of thousands of firearms from law-abiding shooters appears to have had no impact on the overall misuse of guns in armed hold-ups. ABS figures indicate that in 1996, around 25% of armed robberies involved a firearm. (2) The data for 1997 show that guns were still used in 24.2% of offences. (3) Obviously very few armed robbers bothered to surrender their weapons to the government.
Murder and gun ownership ratios don't add up
Comparing the 1997 murder
rates with the levels of firearm density within particular states also brings
up some critical questions about the supposed relationship between homicide
and gun ownership. According to the ABS figures, Western Australia, which
is generally acknowledged as having the lowest firearm ownership density per
head of population, with around 7.8% of persons over the age of 15 owning
a gun, (4) currently has a murder
rate of 1.67 persons per 100,000. Tasmania, however, with the highest ratio
of gun ownership at 13.6%, (5) has a rate of just 1.48 persons per 100,000, 0.19 persons per 100,000 behind
Western Australia (despite having nearly twice the number of gun owners per
head of population) and 0.26 below the national average of 1.74. The Northern
Territory, on the other hand, which has had firm firearm regulation for some
time compared (until recently) to Tasmania's generous laws, nevertheless has
a murder rate of 4.28 persons per 100,000, 2.8 times that of Tasmania and
almost 2.5 times the average for the rest of the country. Clearly, significant
factors which have nothing whatsoever to do with firearm regulation are responsible
for overall homicide rates.
The details of the 1997 murder rate also offer another serious rebuke of the government's claim that 'Australia will be a safer place'. For example, despite the forced statewide surrender of 207,220 firearms, not only did Victoria's overall number of murders increase by 18% between 1996 and 1997, but the number of homicides committed with a firearm rose by nearly 300%. (6) All jurisdictions, with the exception of the Northern Territory, experienced increases in their overall number of homicide offences in 1997. (Note: allowing for 35 murders in a single incident in 1996, Tasmania's total number of homicides rose from 2 to 7 in 1997.) The total number of homicides committed in Western Australia rose by a very substantial 33%.
As with armed robbery, confiscating firearms from law-abiding people appears to have had absolutely no impact at all on the overall incidence of murder in Australia.
Unlawful entry and home invasion
Reports of 'Unlawful entry'
also rose substantially between 1996 and 1997. The Australian Bureau of Statistics
characterises unlawful entry in two ways, as either unlawful entry with intent
(UEWI) involving the taking of property, or (UWEI) other; the ABS defines
them both as those crimes which include "burglary and break and enter offences." (7) They are precisely the sort
of infractions which can give rise to what we have unfortunately come to know
as 'home invasion', where an unsuspecting occupant is confronted by a would-be
robber.
The increase in the rate of unlawful entry, coupled with the recent nationwide moves to prohibit the possession of firearms for self-defence, places Australian home-owners in a particularly damning position. Not only are they faced with an overly complex set of legalities concerning the use of force, but at the most fundamental level they must face the fact that in all probability the police will not be there to assist them in their moment of greatest need and they now have no effective, legitimate means of defending themselves.
We are confronted daily with instances where people are assaulted, robbed, raped and in a significant proportion of cases killed in their own homes at the hands of increasingly bold and violent 'break and enter' criminals. Yet by and large, law-makers remain staunchly opposed to the idea that the right to self-defence should be guaranteed, even more so the freedom to defend one's life with a firearm. However, the recently released study, Crime, Deterrence, And The Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns (8), prepared by Chicago University professors John Lott and David Mustard, is shedding new light on the effectiveness of private firearm ownership for self-defence in the home.
Lott and Mustard's work reveals some surprising facts concerning the incidence of what are described as 'hot crimes'. These are crimes such as burglary and break and enters where the perpetrator is likely to come into contact with a victim - in other words, break-ins where miscreants deliberately force their way in while the home is occupied, or 'home invasion'. Comparing break-in statistics for the US, Canada and Britain, Kenneth Mays (9), drawing on Lott and Mustard's data, points to a startling differential. In both Canada and Britain, countries with very restrictive firearm laws at least comparable to Australia's with regard to self-defence, more than 50% of burglaries fall into the category of potentially 'hot crimes'. By comparison, in the US, where private firearms ownership for self-defence in one's own residence is commonplace, less than 13% of break and enters are committed while the occupier is at home. This is a very significant 400% reduction.
Obviously the possibility that one might be met by an armed occupant has a significant deterrent effect on potential home invaders. Mays notes the possibility that a potential victim may be armed "raises the criminal's expected risks or costs from committing these type of crimes." (10) The result is that in the US experience, far fewer burglaries are perpetrated where innocent people are likely to be hurt or killed in their own homes. At some point in the not too distant future will we see an Australian victim of home invasion suing a state government for damages as a result of not being allowed to possess a firearm for self-defence?.
Safer community
Given the very real growth
in serious crime, Australian shooters forced to surrender their firearms to
the government would be right in asking just precisely what criteria John
Howard had in mind for gauging a supposedly "safer community" (11) when he made his predictions during his now infamous flak jacket address to
gun owners at Sale in 1996. In assessing the impact of the government's ill-conceived
anti-firearm agenda, the Australian Bureau of Statistics data clearly show
that Howard's 1996 claims were nothing more than hot air. Indeed, Australia
is less safe now than it was before the current Federal regime set about expropriating
people's property and attempting to undermine private firearms ownership generally.
The Prime Minister also claimed in his Sale speech: "If the political process
in Australia turns against me because of the decision I have taken, then I
will accept that decision." (12) Given the anger of hundreds of thousands of justifiably irate shooters right
around the country, it might prove to be the only forecast Mr Howard got right.
1. (1998). 1997 Recorded Crime: Australia. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
2. (1997). 1996 Recorded Crime: Australia. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
3. (1998). 1997 Recorded Crime: Australia. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
4. Harding, R. (1981). Firearms and Violence in Australian Life. Nedlands: University
of Western Australia Press.
5. Ibid.
6. ABS data, see: (1997). 1996 Recorded Crime: Australia. Canberra: Australian
Bureau of Statistics, and (1998). 1997 Recorded Crime: Australia. Canberra:
Australian Bureau of Statistics.
7. (1998). 1997 Recorded Crime: Australia. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics,
p. 10.
8. Lott, J and Mustard, D (1997) "Crime, Deterrence, And The Right-To-Carry Concealed
Handguns", Journal of Legal Studies, vol. XXVI (January 1997).
9. Mays, K (1997). "The American Path: Crime, Deterrence & Concealed Carry",
Guns Australia. Sept/Oct 1997, pp. 37-41.
10. Ibid. p. 40.
11. Gordon, M (1996, June 17). "PM braves angry gun crowd", The Australian, p.
1.
12. Ibid.
Home > Research archive > 1998 > Firearm Control - Assessing the Impact