The difference between American and Australians on Guns

Published on May 20, 2005 By Phoenixboi In Blogging

Here is an article I found, I posted it as a comment on my last article on Guns are for killing.. but I think it deserves a special mention on it's own it might clear up a little of the confusion on why I think society here, where I live is different to American society.

The Australian/American Gun Law Debate
By Gabrielle Reilly

Being an Australian American, I regularly find myself in the middle of the great gun debate between the two countries’ philosophies on gun ownership. Australians want Americans to have fewer guns and stricter rules, and Americans claim the Australian government has removed Australians’ right to defend themselves by implementing such strict gun laws in Australia. It is not until you have lived in both countries and understand the historic build-up and culture that you can really understand the two vastly different attitudes to gun ownership. All sorts of statistics are manipulated to prove both points of view, but I believe the whole issue needs to be accessed from a much more fundamental point of view… geographic location and the risk of predators, the origins of the first settlers, and human nature. Surprisingly, part of my opinion was inspired from watching the creatures that inhabit the Galapagos Islands.

The Galapagos Islands were formed by underwater volcanoes 500 miles from land. The creatures that inhabit the new and remote islands arrived by ocean or air to an environment with no existing threats so they had no predators… a lot like Australia. The creatures on the Galapagos Islands enjoy a spoilt innocence unlike most creatures around the world. Scientists concluded after researching these creatures that fear is a behavioral adaptation and when it is unnecessary, fear disappears. Perhaps that is why Australians are famous for that line “no worries, mate.”

When Australia was settled, the authorities (the British soldiers) had the guns and the settlers/convicts, for the most part, obeyed the rules. The Aboriginals in Australia were nomadic and so a fight over land ownership was nominal compared to the gruesome fights America’s first settlers had with the Native American. The majority of settlers to Australia were from the United Kingdom and most people viewed the world in pretty much the same way. Guns never became part of day-to-day life in Australia, which operated under an organized structure from the beginning.

British authorities took care of security; there was no threat on the island, no threat on the border, and the settlers spoke the same language and held similar ideals. Australians really became very similar to the creatures that enjoy the serenity of the Galapagos Islands and have lived without fear. Australians have never felt the need to have to defend themselves, so they don’t feel like the government is taking any rights away, but in fact, are giving them the right to continue to live without fear. So if the creatures of the Galapagos Islands are happy and live in relative peace, why would you want to introduce a wolf to disrupt the status quo? Then why would you want to introduce guns now in Australia? So let’s review America’s origins and threats.

America shares borders and has not enjoyed the luxury of being an isolated island. The original settlers came from all over Europe with vastly different ideals. The original 13 states were inhabited with revolutionaries who fought the king, people fleeing from religious persecution, the Puritans, the Quakers… all speaking many different languages and having different ideals. They had to fight for America from the day they arrived between the Minutemen who fought the British to people moving west fighting Native Americans. Heck, then they fought each other.

Americans had to have guns to protect their families because there was no central control to protect them at that point as they established a new society. This gun-owning culture has been ingrained over the generations and if guns were removed from society there would be an uprising. They do not believe the government should protect them and in fact many feel the need, unlike Australians, that they should be allowed to bear arms to protect themselves from their government as the revolutionaries did when they left England. The second amendment is the right to bear arms and many Americans associate that right with the right to protect their families still.

So Americans had just cause to evolve with guns. They had predators and people settling the country with different ideals. Americans sought freedom from the British Empire, and Australia became a colony under the British Empire’s protection. Justifiable fear has become ingrained in the American culture, which is why Americans feel as vigilantly that they have a right to own a gun as Australians fight to avoid the introduction of the gun. The most basic premise for the people of both countries is security and knowing their own culture. Both cultures know what the threats are and what offers their family the most security.

Considering the many issues to contend with, America really had as much diversity as Europe and has managed to create an impressive society over the past few hundred years (although not perfect) for the many different tribes to live alongside each other. Tolerance to different ideals and patriotism to a central ideal of one “America” has been key to that unity and success.

Without understanding the fundamentally different cultures and attitudes that come only from living in both America and Australia, it is virtually impossible to understand how both sides of this debate do have very valid points. What we need to recognize is that the issues are so different in each country that the same gun law model cannot be used for both countries. You cannot have cookie cutter gun laws in the same way you cannot have cookie cutter democracies. You cannot take someone’s history away, and it is their history that leads them to make the decisions they make. Everyone’s history is so different and there are so many things we just don’t know we don’t know.

END

Link

Comments (Page 1)

Larry Kuperman

on May 20, 2005

Interesting article. I might add thought-provoking.

To many Americans, guns are associated with freedom. "Americans sought freedom from the British Empire" as you pointed out. Guns played an important part in the rebellion. Possibly as a result of our revolutionary roots, we associate guns with our cherished ideal of living free. "Live free or die" as a maxim had it's origins in revolutionary times. A hundred years later we would add "God created all men, Samuel Colt made all men equal."

Frankly, I am not sure that is far off the mark. The ability to mass produce the gun is what ended feudalism all around the world. The knight, the Samurai, whatever way we refer to the warrior born, couldn't compete against an army of freemen with guns.

There is no hero more symbolic of American values than the gunslinger. The gun is a part of the American myth-structure. It is imbedded in our subconscious as a symbol of freedom and reinforced by culture.

But I never thought about the differences with Australia. Don't you remember Ned Kelly?

Phoenixboi

on May 20, 2005

To many Americans, guns are associated with freedom

And for me that doesnt make sense.. because for me freedom is without guns.

dharmagrl

on May 20, 2005

To many Americans, guns are associated with freedom

And for me that doesnt make sense.. because for me freedom is without guns.

How can you say that when you've never owned, held or even been around a gun? If you had had some experience of guns I could understand how you'd be able to say that you felt more 'freedom' without them.....

scatter629

on May 20, 2005

very insightful article spanning the geographic and cultural nuances across the globe. There must be some good sense then in exiling convicts from an established society to inhabit areas of our planet once thought inhabitable. Attempting to make paradise out of "hell" is no mean feat, not to mention changing peoples' mindset about guns.

"you cannot have cookie cutter gun laws in the same way you cannot have cookie cutter democracies" - G. Reily

I wish more Americans would understand this too.

Phoenixboi

on May 20, 2005

D...

I feel safer without a gun than I would having one. Even though I havent held or owned one.. I dont feel the need to have one and inside me I know I feel safer knowing that there isnt a gun around.

drmiler

on May 20, 2005

feel safer without a gun than I would having one. Even though I havent held or owned one.. I dont feel the need to have one and inside me I know I feel safer knowing that there isnt a gun around.

That's because that is the way you were brought up. That doesn't make it right or wrong, any more than your "opinion" makes the way we were brought up right or wrong.

bakerstreet

on May 20, 2005

"I feel safer without a gun than I would having one. Even though I havent held or owned one.. I dont feel the need to have one and inside me I know I feel safer knowing that there isnt a gun around."

I think that is demonstrative of your whole outlook on guns, especially your 'guns are just for killing' attitude. You don't see any uses for them or reason to have them because you have never used or had them. How would you know?

You can't imagine your society accepting guns because you've never experienced those segments of your society that do. You can't imagine people who aren't killers owning guns, because the only use you see for them is killing.

When I say ignorance, I don't mean stupidity, I mean real, definitive ignorance. He's also ignoring what I have read to be 1 in 4 Australians that own firearms. He diverts to crime, he diverts to US attitudes, but in the end the whole 'guns are just for killing people' premise is morbidly flawed.

dharmagrl

on May 20, 2005

You don't see any uses for them or reason to have them because you have never used or had them. How would you know?

As usual, Baker says what I wanted to say, what I had tried to say, and does so far more eloquently than I did/could.

Moderateman

on May 20, 2005

As usual, Baker says what I wanted to say, what I had tried to say, and does so far more eloquently than I did/could.

yep darn that eloquent baker.. always getting to the point in short meaningful sentences.

Phoenixboi

on May 20, 2005

Baker..

What was the main reason that guns were invented?

You see I understand your points and I am not ignorant of the issues that you brought up. I havent ignored or dismissed the comments made by people who have guns and dont kill with them. What I am saying is that the main intention of having a gun is to use it, whether it be for sport (olympic or hunting or target practise) or for personal protection or for crime.

No guns dont kill people. It is the people behind the gun who do. The same argument goes for drugs, its not the drugs that kill people but the people who take them, no one is forcing them to take the drug. What I am saying here is the purpose of a gun is to shoot a metal slug to hit a target, and it's primary role in human history has been to kill, whether it be human or otherwise.

They arent a toy, they arent something that I would hang on my wall as a beautiful thing.

I guess it is a matter of difference in opinion here. I respect your opinions and I agree to disagree with you on some of them. Because like the author of the article above states...

When Australia was settled, the authorities (the British soldiers) had the guns and the settlers/convicts, for the most part, obeyed the rules. The Aboriginals in Australia were nomadic and so a fight over land ownership was nominal compared to the gruesome fights America’s first settlers had with the Native American. The majority of settlers to Australia were from the United Kingdom and most people viewed the world in pretty much the same way. Guns never became part of day-to-day life in Australia, which operated under an organized structure from the beginning. British authorities took care of security; there was no threat on the island, no threat on the border, and the settlers spoke the same language and held similar ideals. Australians really became very similar to the creatures that enjoy the serenity of the Galapagos Islands and have lived without fear. Australians have never felt the need to have to defend themselves, so they don’t feel like the government is taking any rights away, but in fact, are giving them the right to continue to live without fear. So if the creatures of the Galapagos Islands are happy and live in relative peace, why would you want to introduce a wolf to disrupt the status quo? Then why would you want to introduce guns now in Australia?

bakerstreet

on May 21, 2005

"What I am saying is that the main intention of having a gun is to use it, whether it be for sport (olympic or hunting or target practise) or for personal protection or for crime."

No doubt. The difference seems to be that you can't fathom why anyone would want to use a gun. That isn't a limitation of the gun, that is a limitation of your own knowledge. Instead of welcoming new knowledge, you just dismiss it. You say guns are for just for killing, we show you they aren't, then you say "Sure, but you are still USING them" as though any use for a gun is evil.

You don't see the falacy of that? You dare people to give you uses, then whey they do, you deem ANY use as wrong since it is using a gun. To me such an uneducated, knee jerk reaction is frightening. You can make this my opinion/your opinion, but you have to admit that your opinion is functioning without much knowledge of the subject.

Much like that quote you keep using from someone who shares your imaginary view of Australia. You don't find it insane to say "Then why would you want to introduce guns now in Australia?" when there are millions of guns in Australia, owned by Australians, used by Australians, and have been for ages?

The problem here, again, is that you have no clue concerning guns or gun owners or gun use, even, apparently, in your own nation. You have a bank of little biases that you draw upon, but they don't seem to reflect any reality. Australia is a nation with double-digit gun ownership, not some gun free Galapagos.

bakerstreet

on May 21, 2005

Your own gun control sites state the number of firearms in Australia to be about 2.5 million in a nation of 20 million. One figure I saw stated 1 in 4 households. Is that a gun-free utopia?

Phoenixboi

on May 21, 2005

Have I said anywhere that guns should be banned?

zergimmi

on May 21, 2005

When I say ignorance, I don't mean stupidity, I mean real, definitive ignorance. He's also ignoring what I have read to be 1 in 4 Australians that own firearms. He diverts to crime, he diverts to US attitudes, but in the end the whole 'guns are just for killing people' premise is morbidly flawed.

Those figures would be way out of date, the reality in Australia is that we do not feel the same threat from the world, that people of the US do, for many reasons including those mentioned in the article. This is why we do not feel the same need for being personally armed. In regard to Hunting for instance, only introduced animals can be hunted without a permit, even if you wish to hunt kangeroos you must have a permit and usually only people specifically registered for this with specific numbers of kills in line with annual cull rates can do this. While Australians do have guns for sports shooting, this is heavilly regulated, and in the main adhered to. The reality is that while we may have much in common, we still have some very origns in the way we were established, and as such different outlook on the world. I do not for one minute even try to critise the attitudes of the US, however most Australians do seem to feel safer and more trustfull of Government in general, quite possibly because we do not have the republican system with presendital rule, our prime minister is elected the same way as all other ministers, and can be removed by his/her party, and/or at the next election, even just by loosing in his/her own electorate, not to mention the Governor General can sack the Government, most Australians are happy with this. There is also the fact that most Australians are pretty laid back, and in the main politics is what we argue over, but don't get too upset about.
We have shown both here and in the UK that we do not need guns, we have lower rates of murder and crime, specially gun related, however the reality if people really want guns they can get them, just not legally. I grew up in a household where we did have many gun, yet I can never really remember using them except learning how to handle them. So I myself do not have or feel the need for ownership. Its just the way we have developed and you guys have developed, I see no problem if you guys are happy, however the quickest way to stop gun related deaths is to get rid of or lower the amount of guns, but that is up to you guys, its yuour busines not mine.

As for 2.5 million, this is a survey done by newspoll, could be higher could be lower, I know a lot of people, and I can say that none of them have guns, it would be impossible to know how many guns are still in australia, but I would say that in the main there is far lowre percieved need for ownership, most australian don't care to own a gun, and what we can own is far more limited than what is available in the US.

Phoenixboi

on May 21, 2005

Thanks zergimmi! I was wondering when some of the aussies would come and join this discussion.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!