With the Nationals losing their footing to the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, one can naturally assume that the gun vote won over. This is incorrect.
The ALP’s push-back against the Liberal Party’s gun discussion has little to do with the greater good, and everything to do with political point-scoring.
The coverage of the Margaret River tragedy shows the sensationalism about the spectre of Port Arthur obscures the greater discussion we need to have.
The generally held concept is that our sweeping gun reforms in 1996 forever stopped mass shootings in this country. The truth is quite different.
Yesterday we lost our minds when George Christensen uploaded a questionable image to Facebook. While it was a silly thing to do, our reaction didn’t fit.
Gun laws are the sacred cow of the Australian experience, but just because we don’t have the problems that the US does, we’d be foolish to assume that all is well.
The ongoing soap opera of the Adler shotgun has revealed a more dangerous threat, namely how Australian policy is shaped.
The rhetoric surrounding the watering down of our gun laws are fatuous, as we should be having an entirely different conversation.
Editorial bias is not just for publications, as the academic world is beset by the same problems. But as these pieces form the policy of tomorrow, this represents a worrying issue.
The Greens’ decision to expose gun owners in aid of public safety is at odds with stats showing firearm violence decline over the last decade.
Dr Samara McPhedran enters the gun control debate, highlighting how we should look to the US for positives instead of the assumed negatives.
Responding to MLC David Shoebridge’s firearms piece, Dr Samara McPhedran argues that anti-gun lobbyists privilege some forms of “evidence” over all others, at the expense of proper scrutiny.