The 1996 changes haven’t saved a life
The Public Health Association of Australia exists “to promote the health and well-being of all Australians”. They acknowledge, in their Firearms Injury Policy:
A number of peer-reviewed studies have evaluated the impacts of the 1996 ‘buyback’ scheme and legislative changes. None of those studies has found statistical evidence for an impact of the legislative changes on firearm homicide. There are inconsistent findings regarding impacts of the legislative changes on firearm suicide, with some studies finding an effect and other studies finding little or no impact.
You read right. The billions spent on the 1996 buyback and subsequent firearms registries haven’t saved a single life.
But we want more regulation of firearms
The Commonwealth, in conjunction with State and Territory governments should: [..] reduce the number of firearms in the community.
With the abandonment of all reason, we can go on to a further insane proposition.
There is no connection between Islam and terrorism
The PHAA urges the Committee to include a recommendation in its report that disavows the notion that there is any inherent link between Islam and terrorism.
Conclusion: gun control did nothing but we need more
The conclusion to be drawn from this “public health” advocacy group is as follows:
- Restrictive gun laws haven’t saved a single life,
- We need more restrictive gun laws,
- Islam has no connection with violent terrorism (like the 2014 deaths in Sydney’s Lindt cafe).
Little wonder so many electors are looking to minor parties to exhibit some sense. The major parties have absorbed so much of this fertiliser that they’ve lost the plot. They can’t tell the difference between fertiliser and reality. Queensland’s LNP might be an exception, but we’re waiting to see them properly scream “fertiliser!” at Jackie Trad’s anti-gun campaign.