Buffalo Mass Shooting: Here’s how Australia, Britain, Canada and New Zealand

Placeholder when article work is loaded

A gunman killed 10 people and injured three others at a busy supermarket in Buffalo, New York, on Saturday, making it the deadliest mass shooting among 22 people so far.

Authorities are investigating the killings as a case of hate crime and racially motivated violent extremism.

This is the latest example of a genocide in the United States where firearms are a bitterly biased political issue. In other cases, for example, the call for stronger gun control systems has been followed. In March 2021, after a mass shooting at a grocery store in Koloor Boulder that killed 10 people, President Biden issued a flurry of executive orders designed to prevent gun violence.

In the wake of similar genocides, which often occur in the United States but have occurred around the world, many countries have imposed far more ambitious gun-control measures than would be allowed by the courts interpreting the US Constitution.

Here some countries have changed their policy after firing their own masses.

What we know about the victims of the Buffalo Grocery Store attack

In August 1987, Michael Robert Ryan shot and killed 16 people in Hungary, Britain. The level of genocide has shocked the country. At the time, The Washington Post described it as “the worst event in modern British history.”

Ryan, 27, and Baker, were armed with a Chinese copy of a Kalashnikov AK-47 and various other rifles. Its purpose was never discovered. He killed himself and his mother, his only close relative.

In response to the genocide, British Home Secretary Douglas Hard called for an investigation into the legal ownership of the gun Ryan used. The Firearms (Amendment) Act of 1988, passed in support of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s right-wing Conservative government, prohibits the limited sale of semi-automatic weapons and certain types of shotguns.

These weapons were rare in Britain, so the effects were limited. But after another mass shooting in March 1997, when Thomas Hamilton killed 16 children and their teachers at Browning and Smith & Wesson handguns at Dunblane Primary School in Scotland, further sweeping rules were introduced.

Public outrage over the killings led to a strong grassroots campaign called Snowdrop. The 1997 Firearms Act restricts ownership of almost all handguns. Thousands of guns were collected from the owners, whose weapons were given market value. Police cracked down on illegal weapons ownership year after year.

Gun violence peaked in 2005 and gradually declined in the years that followed.

Relatives of those killed in Britain’s mass shootings say their experience could help the United States calculate gun control reforms.

“Eyes are going to Dunblane, and we don’t need to look at Dunblane anymore,” Jack Crozier, whose 5-year-old sister Emma was killed in the genocide, said at an anniversary event in March. “But we need to see what happens in other countries, and especially in America.”

UN leader condemns Buffalo massacre as “horrific act” of racist violence

Martin Bryant, 29, killed 35 people near the historic Port Arthur Prison in Tasmania, Australia, using a legally purchased Colt AR-15 semiautomatic rifle in April 1996. It was the deadliest massacre in 20th century Australia and came just weeks after the massacre. In Dunblane.

The killings drew widespread attention to Australia’s gun laws, which were particularly relaxed in Tasmania. The island, which has its own state government, has only required a gun license since 1988 and no rifle registration.

The Australian federal government, led by then-center-right Prime Minister John Howard, coordinated with states to limit ownership of automatic and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. In one year, the government bought 650,000 firearms.

Some studies have suggested that the program may be successful and that Australia has become a less violent place since the buyback.

In 2013, Howard wrote an op-ed for the New York Times urging President Barack Obama to follow his model. “Very few Australians will deny that their country is safe today because of gun control,” Howard wrote.

In March 2019, Brenton Harrison Tarant, 28, opened fire on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, and killed 51 Muslim worshipers at gunpoint, including an AR-15-rifle. Less than 24 hours later, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced that the country would change its gun laws.

Unlike Australia, New Zealand had relatively loose gun rules and a strong gun lobby. Prior to the attack, there were approximately 250,000 gun owners in the country, with a population of 5 million. Tarant, an Australian citizen who has been living in New Zealand since 2017, bought his weapon legally, although he modified some illegally.

Ardern was able to quickly gather support for stricter gun laws, setting up temporary measures within days. The following month, Parliament formalized the changes, with overwhelming bipartisan support and opposition from only one legislator. The plan included a gun buyback scheme, as well as restrictions on AR-15s and other semi-automatic weapons.

Due to the lax tracking of these weapons, the authorities were not initially sure how many weapons were in the country. “It’s really an open checkbook,” Joe Green, a gun safety expert and former New Zealand Police weapons control manager, told the Washington Post, “because they don’t know how many they’re buying back.”

A second round of gun laws was passed in 2020, which required the establishment of a new firearms registry that would require gun license holders to update when buying or selling firearms.

In an interview with CNN’s Christian Amanpur in June 2019, Ardern said he was confused by the United States’ reluctance to pass gun control laws. “Australia has faced a genocide and changed its laws. New Zealand had experience and changed its laws. To be honest with you, I don’t understand the United States, “he said.

In April 2020, Gabriel Wartman, dressed in a genuine Royal Canadian Mounted police uniform and driving a mock police cruiser, drove through rural Nova Scotia for 13 hours, killing 22 people in the deadliest massacre in modern Canadian history.

Police have shot dead a 51-year-old dentist at a gas station. Court documents show he had two semiautomatic rifles and two pistols. He did not have a firearms license and some weapons were smuggled from the United States.

Two weeks later, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a ban on more than 1,500 manufactures and models of “military-style assault weapons,” including the AR-15 and Ruger Mini-14, which were used in the 1989 genocide that killed 14 people at the Ecole Polytechnic in Montreal. It makes it illegal to shoot, transport, sell, import or bequeath those weapons.

Trudeau, who promised tougher gun-control measures during the 2019 election campaign, said his government was working on a ban before the epidemic. The Conservative Party says the sanctions imposed by the regulatory system are opportunistic.

Last month, the federal government enacted legislation that would create “red flag” laws, establish new firearms offenses and allow municipalities to prohibit handguns through by-laws restricting their possession, storage and transportation.

It promises to launch a buyback program for banned firearms, which it announced last year. There will be a general amnesty by the end of April 2022 to allow owners of those weapons to comply. The buyback program has angered survivors because it is voluntary. Family members of the victims told Ecole Polytechnic that Trudeau would no longer be welcomed to the shooting if the buyback program was not mandatory.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.