Australia's Strict Gun Laws Cost Innocent Lives in Sydney

Australia's Strict Gun Laws Cost Innocent Lives in Sydney

Australia’s strict gun laws–enacted after the Port Author attack in 1996–left Sydney café-goers vulnerable and prevented a swift resolution of the crisis when Islamist gunman ignored the laws and took hostages on December 15.

Business Insider previously reported Australia’s ban on privately held “automatic and semi-automatic weapons”–with few exceptions–and the strict licensing rules and background checks system put in place for the limited types of guns still allowed. The New York Times quoted former Australian PM John Howard–proponent of the gun control laws–as saying, “We do not want the American disease imported into Australia.”

Even on December 15, as an armed Islamist held approximately 17 persons hostage in a Sydney café, Sydney-born comedian Jim Jefferies said the same hostage situation would have been worse in America because the hostage taker would have had “semi automatic weapons and hand guns” instead of a “shotgun.” 

Besides failing to understand that a shotgun can be used to kill more people with one pull of the trigger than a semi automatic, Jefferies and other gun control sycophants missed the most crucial point of all–human dignity. 

America’s Founding Fathers believed a key component to human dignity was the ability to defend one’s life and the lives of others. To deny that ability–to deny that right–was to undercut the value of human life by implying it was not worth defending.

Because of Australia’s gun control laws, café-goers in Sydney were at the mercy of one armed man–just like students and teachers at Sandy Hook, movie goers at the Aurora theater, and employees at the DC Navy Yard (carried out with a shotgun, by the way). The attacker who entered the Sydney cafe didn’t have to worry about being outnumbered because he knew odds were in his favor that he would be the only person armed.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins   Reach him directly at