Home Australia Gun Control, Part 3: The 1996 Gun Buy-Back in Australia

Gun Control, Part 3: The 1996 Gun Buy-Back in Australia



by Terry Shulze

If you have wondered what really happened during the “buy-back”, you are not alone. The Federal government will not release the breakdown in the figures. Now since at least 500 million dollars was used and possibly as much as 1 billion in all, you would think that the person paying for the tab could get an accounting. Well, the taxpayers of Australia not only did not get an accounting, they had to pay for a Newspoll Market Research push-polling report that was put together to justify the waste. Just imagine what your answer might have been to question number (5) “Do you think you might have a gun which has become illegal under the new gun laws?”. Or perhaps your answer to number (6) “If you owned a gun which has become illegal would you say you personally would be likely to hand in the gun which has become illegal?” Not surprisingly, the poll showed an amazing compliance rate.

The best figures available were from the state of Victoria. Although there were no final figures (and they won’t be forth coming!), the state gave a breakdown up until three weeks before the end of the “buy-back”. The state also handed in a third of the firearms in Australia, so it is a pretty good sample to draw from. Here is what it shows.

Automatic – .1%, Center-fire self-loading – 3.2%, Pump action shotguns – 15.1%, Self-loading shotguns – 32.7%, Rimfires – 47.5%, other -1.8%.

The automatics came primarily from museums and RSL Clubs and were therefore a non-event. However, the “Center-fire self-loading” firearms were the primary target of the buy-back. The 3.2% are not broken down between military and civilian rifles, but note this, Victoria had registration prior to the “buy-back”, without registration the level of compliance would have been lower. So what do the figures show us? It shows that almost half of the firearms turned in were lousy .22 pea rifles, a rifle that not one nation in the world issues to its solders because on its anemic power. The figures also show that 47.8% of the rifles were shotguns, a firearm that Hitler allowed the occupied French to keep.

It has been estimated that there were some 400,000 SKS, SKK and their variants imported into Australian up until the early 1990’s. Only about 8,000 were turned in, that is just 2%, or to state it another way – 98% of those rifles are still in the community. There were also some 500,000 M1 carbines sold off in Australia; it is safe to say that at least half would still be out there. From the figures, it is obvious that the people smelled a rat.

A “safer Australia” because of the tough new gun laws, I think not. The non-compliance rate is staggering. If you wonder why the non-compliance rate is so high, just take a careful look at the “tough but fair” gun laws. For example, let’s say you go to court for a traffic offence. The magistrate puts you on a good behavior bond. Well, you can still drive, you still can keep your driver’s license, but you can no longer have a shooter’s license. Now just try to explain to a gun owner why that is logical, why it is fair. Ask yourself, would I be willing to “sit in the back of the bus?”

More AIC Propaganda

The government is still pumping out propaganda to justify this gross encroachment on liberty. When the Select Committee on Gun Law Reform was established in 1991, the report used supporting documentation from the AIC. Many of those supporting documents were International Crime Survey reports prepared with the help of UNICRI. (By the way, UNICRI is an autonomous body of the UN that does not receive its funding from the UN, so where does it receive its funding? If you find out, let me know I believe in the old saying, “follow the money”.) The Report of the Select Committee is probably the worst piece of “junk science” that has ever been assembled in Australia, and yes, the Australian taxpayer paid for it too. There is not one statistic, table, graph or bar chart that supports the conclusion of the Committee. In fact, the very OPPOSITE conclusion can be drawn from the statistics that the more firearms in society, the less firearm homicide result -true.

The following year the AIC came under fire in NSW with the AIC’s sexual violence statistics that stated that Australia was the most sexually violent society in the world! This prompted a Select Committee to look at the credibility of the AIC research on sexual violence. The comprehensive research of the 208-page report is 104 pages of debunking the AIC research. The findings of that Select Committee are significant to the “gun debate”, the Committee recommended that the AIC information not to be taken into consideration when making policy decisions. I have no doubt that if a similar committee looked into the firearm research it would come to the same conclusion.

One interesting bit from the Select Committee on Gun Law Reform report is a coroner’s table that shows crime in NSW from the year’s 82/83 to 89/90, the year before the Committee. In the table, all crime is up except firearm crime. That’s right, robbery with a weapon not a firearm up about 83%, assault up about 300%, serious assault up about 165%, murder up about 20%; however, robbery with a firearm is down 44% over the seven year period. Now remember, that NSW implemented most of the NCV (Howard Gun Laws) in 1992. So what happened to the firearm robbery rate after the new laws? – It escalated that’s what. It is hard getting the statistics, but at least the newspapers will report 34% in one year, 28% in another year. Of course, there may be other reasons that it skyrocketed, but the rise doesn’t give credence to the effectiveness of the gun laws.

A taxpayer might think that the AIC would take that into account when considering the effectiveness of the NCV/APMC gun laws. After all, there would be seven years of statistics available to evaluate the effectiveness of the NCV gun laws. However, the recent AIC report of May 1999, “Firearm-related Violence: The Impact of the Nationwide Agreement on Firearms” does not take it into account. In fact, the report follows the same old waste of taxpayer’s money road that all the previous research followed. Yes, suicides and accidents are still counted; yes, the sleight-of-hand-techniques are still used. For example, Figure 5 in the report is a class act; it shows firearm robberies in NSW as a percentage of all robberies. Now get this; you have both firearm robberies and other robberies going up, how do you handle the spin. Easy, you note that firearm robberies aren’t going up as fast as other robberies, so you make up a chart that shows firearm robberies as a declining percentage of robberies. – I feel safer by the minute.

I’ll end my discussion on the AIC with a quote from its new Director, Adam Graycar. In February of this year there was another AIC report entitled “CSCAP Working Group on Transnational Crime – Small Arms Project: An Australian Perspective”. In that report Graycar stated, “In order to regulate the traffic of firearms at an international level, it is necessary to begin by regulating it at both a regional and national level.”

The International Movement

The international push for the disarmament of the people is gathering momentum. It is aided and abetted by people in our own community, by our own politicians, by useful fool bureaucrats and by the journalists who turn a blind eye. Virtually every month there is another meeting somewhere in the world moving Australia and the other countries ever closer to international laws on personal disarmament. Forget bio-chemical or nuclear weapons, those important issues no longer seem to have quite the backing and press coverage they used to have. Now the emphasis is to make sure the common people can no longer give big government any problems. Stop and think: you don’t believe Soros, Rothchilds, Rockefellers, et al. really gives a damn about violence in YOUR neighborhood do you?

No, just like the MAI, IMF, World Bank, NAFTA and all the other “New World Order” arrangements, the movement for the disarmament of the people will not be for the benefit of the common people. However, it could be a real benefit to a world elite who may worry about the masses drawing a line in the sand at some future incidence of oppression. There has never really been a legitimate debate about “gun control” in Australia; perhaps this article may start one.



  1. Ah, Terry. There is nothing like the passage of time. You say “maybe this article will start a debate in Australia.” Why not. The pukey video of Amy Goodman proves that we need one both “here” and “there.” (By the way, I have been wanting to fix Goodman’s wagon since the death of Troy Davis 5 years ago.)

    Your article has taught me a lot. Of course like all Seppo’s I was born with a silver gun in my mouth. But it’s a hard sell nowadays. I just went to look at my Tamerlan-related video “To the Governor of Massachusetts” (gotta take the “M” off the beginning of that state’s name), and found that I actually have a follower somewhere in the world. He says Governor Baker need only call one press conference. What a thought!

  2. Well said, Terry. I’ve been reading Andrew Macgregor’s information on the same topic. It seems there are dozens, maybe hundreds of traitors in Australia doing the United Nations’ dirty work. If our politicians had any decency they would withdraw Australia from the United Nations Organisation, as it is a cover for the One World Government of Zionist psychopaths.

    • Ok,
      But include nazis, commo’s, fascists, bankers, collectivists, [ref: G E (E G) Griffin] Et. Al., psychopaths all part of the same: NWO anti democratic control freaks. All aided by their controlled main stream media that they own…… not to forget our treasonous Canberra club
      Dr. Day; you pinged it!.

  3. “maybe start a debate” – yeah sure. Crikey, this information has been out there for a long time, but people are scared of it. I discovered they don’t even want to mention it, let alone have a meaningful debate. Throw in a big massacre promoted by their own government to push the agenda – and they don’t want to know.

    You can give a man information, but you can’t give him courage.

    We are headed for collapse, it has happened through out history. Over and over again, different location, different time, different culture, but always the same patterns.

    I liken it to being on a passenger train heading for a burned out bridge. You can try to warn the other passengers until you are blue in the face, but they are having too much fun – finally you just jump off the train.

    • I take issue with the idea that the info has been out there for a long time.T echnically you are right, Terry, as you published this very piece 27 years ago. But I — for example — knew nothing of the game of statistics in regard to gun deaths.

      Also I read many things about Port Arthur without coming across the kicker about Bernadette and Roland. I finally found it in Beattie’s book this year. It needs circulating.

      When I saw Michael Moore’s movie about the role of ammo in the decline of society I assumed he was telling the troof.

      But I have to agree wih you on the train headed for a burned out bridge. Defo. Let’s just give up now an all commit suicide. Yay!

  4. Hate to imagine, if I was in the Lindt Cafe with a shangi and a marble ot two, what I could have done to Monis. Then again I was only about eight years when I was handy with one. Then at nine plus years we all had air guns in town and the local seargent could not give a toss……….. we were all entertained out of town and out of trouble.
    They were Aussie childhood days!! (‘tll being a “stolen generation’ sent off to boarding school, but we had the cadets with 303s to continue)


      Ned, what’s this about you killing Monis? He was referred to routinely in Coroner’s Court today as “the cunt.” I must say the bonhomie of the court is pretty impressive. I don’t have the situation under control yet, but it seems that some of the lawyers are trying to prove that the tactical teams did not act fast enough.

      That could mean:

      1. did not act fast enough earlier in the day when they could have gone in on a DAP (deliberate action plan)

      2. or it can mean that they did not say “go go go” (or “get the cunt”) when the first shot was heard, but instead waited for the second shot – or, but this is contentious, a third shot — fired by the you-know-whom.

      I am preparing some analytical articles on the Inquest set-up, but at this point I can say I don’t detect any “falseness” in the testimony given by the cop who led Team Charlie in through one door or the “senior” cop who led Team Alpha in another door, at 2am.

      Both guys are very blokey and the senior one wasn’t having it when the lawyer kept suggesting that on a hot day after 16 hours of wearing kit that weighed 25 kilos he might be less than perfectly alert at that hour of the night.

      Of course, Ned, you also would not be the least fatigued with your marble weapon in the stolen boarding-house generation, I’m sure. Why don’t you join us tomorrow at 88 Goulburn, 10am, having first flashed your passport at 147 Liverpool St to get the standard-issue hospital bracelet?

      Advise ear protection if coarse language is not for you.

  5. Ned, your comments about an earlier Australian life reminded me of my mate Barry Liggins and how when he was a kid he would get on a train with a .22 to hunt rabbits out near Penrith. He would spend the day hunting and always bring home two for dinner, but the rest he sold to commuters on the train. Nobody batted an eye that he had his rifle with him on the train.

    I’ve mentioned Justice Moffitt’s book ‘A Quarter to Midnight’ several times on Gumshoes. He wrote about the trends he saw, but I don’t think he could have ever imagined the decline of the Rule of Law in Australia to the point of something like the Port Arthur Massacre.

  6. […] MacGregor’s is partly available via his lectures on Youtube, and on the Internet as a series of articles carried by SoutheastAsiaNews.com and/or LoveOfLife.com.au. Beattie’s book graces the shelf of the State Library of Tasmania, as “a DVD.”  I also consulted a third researcher who does not wish to be named. And in regard to the gun-control agenda, I’ve learned from Terry Shulze’s 3-part article on that subject (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3). […]

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion