Two Countries

Two responses to gun massacres

The side-by-side comparison between Australia’s response to a gun massacre and the United States’ non-response to the mass shooting at Brown University highlights the contrast between a functional democracy and a dysfunctional one, between one governed by a grown-up and one ruled by a self-obsessed man-child with aspirations of autocratic control.

From the start, we saw the vivid contrast in both competence and compassion between the two governments. In the United States, the Trump regime played the role of crank commentator. In the middle of the emergency, with students and faculty hunkering down in closets, cafes, and dorms, Donald Trump falsely announced that the suspect was in custody.

Brett Smiley, the mayor of Providence, Rhode Island, on Saturday effectively told residents to ignore the White House. “In this day and age, there is a lot of misinformation that can spread.” He told them that if an update did not come from the city government, “then it is not official.” Ponder that: For our own safety we need to ignore Trump’s impulsive posts.

Later, Trump effectively blamed the university for “reversing” its warning. You would think the president would have the latest facts. On Monday, Trump continued to blame Brown for not finding the culprit, as if this were not the FBI’s job. (Brown University is absent from the national security org. chart.)

The FBI was no help. Director Kash Patel got slammed for posting about the person in custody just hours before he was released. Critics pointed out that Patel made the very same blunder (prematurely declaring a suspect in custody) in the Charlie Kirk murder. Patel also claimed credit for technological wizardry in locating the person (who wasn’t a suspect at all), when in fact a local tip alerted police. The New York Times reported:

Mr. Patel’s impulse to seize the spotlight and publicize the work of the bureau under his leadership has revived questions about his competence and his future in the administration. …It has added to the growing criticism over his recreational travel, his use of a SWAT team to protect his girlfriend and his handling of the Epstein files.

Until Trump decides to remove his embarrassing pick, Patel will persist in destroying the institution formerly regarded as the gold-standard in law enforcement. (Fortunately, the regime’s utterly irresponsible utterances did not result in any further injuries or deaths at Brown—but the deterioration in the federal government’s credibility will surely intensify under this crowd.)

In Australia, information about the slaughter of 15 Jews (with scores more injured) was released in a formal, dignified appearance by top officials once they had solid information. Within hours of the mayhem, the police commissioner declared it was a terrorist attack; New South Wales Premier Chris Minns said the shooting was a targeted assault on Sydney’s Jewish community. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese spoke with dignity and authority at a press conference:

This afternoon, there has been a devastating terrorist incident at Bondi at the Chanukah by the Sea celebration. This is a targeted attack on Jewish Australians on the first day of Chanukah, which should be a day of joy, a celebration of faith.

He emotionally embraced the Jewish community. “An attack on Jewish Australians is an attack on every Australian, and every Australian tonight will be like me, devastated by this attack on our way of life,” he said. “There is no place for this hate, violence and terrorism in our nation. Let me be clear—we will eradicate it.” He continued: “Amidst this vile act of violence and hate will emerge a moment of national unity where Australians across the board will embrace their fellow Australians of Jewish faith.”

When asked about criticism that his government had not acted sooner to stop a spate of antisemitic violence, he did not insult the reporter. He replied calmly, “Yes, we have taken it seriously and we’ve continued to act. We’ve continued to work with Jewish community leaders. We’ve continued to take all the advice from the security agencies to put in place special measures, and we will continue to do so.”

The contrast between Australia and the U.S. sharpened in subsequent days. In Australia, the press, public, and politicians all operated with the assumption that something would be done about guns. (Australia already has tough gun laws enacted after the Port Arthur mass shooting; it had not experienced anything comparable in the intervening 30 years.)

Within a day, Albanese announced that “the Government is prepared to take whatever action is necessary.” He added: “Included in that is the need for tougher gun laws. … I will put on the agenda of the National Cabinet tougher gun laws, including limits on the number of guns that can be used or licensed by individuals, and a review of licenses over a period of time.”

Moreover, Albanese acknowledged that former prime minister John Howard’s “gun laws have made an enormous difference in Australia and a proud moment of reform, quite rightly, achieved across the Parliament with bipartisan support.” (Imagine praising your predecessor!) He added, “If we need to toughen these up, if there’s anything we can do, I’m certainly up for it and I hope to get National Cabinet on board for that this afternoon as well.”

That is how a responsive and responsible government behaves in the wake of a devastating event: It acts.

In the U.S., just as we tragically have come to expect (our expectations attest to the severity of our political dysfunction) there was little to no talk of new gun laws or mental health funding (slashed in the big ugly bill’s Medicaid cuts and endangered when people lose Obamacare coverage).

Instead, Trump declared: “Things happen,” an appalling admission that MAGA forces have no interest in protecting Americans from mass killings. Trump’s callousness and fatalism reflect his own warped mind, but also the attitude of a rightwing movement that insists on denouncing any limitation on their rights (you’re not the boss of me!) for the greater good (e.g., stop mass killings of kids). This does not include women’s reproductive rights, unsurprisingly.

In other words, the gun lobby only partially accounts for failure to enact national common sense gun laws. We cannot ignore the role played by a reactionary ideology antithetical to American progress and reform, one badly ignorant of our own history and dependent on judicial fiat to get its way.

We have a popular consensus on many gun safety measures (e.g., red flag laws). However, we have a democracy problem preventing their enactment. So long as one party (insulated from accountability by gerrymandering) remains in the thrall of a paranoid anti-government cult allergic to social responsibility, we will be stuck in the endless loop of death, finger pointing, and paralysis.

Australia shows us there is another way for democracies to function. Perpetual slaughter of our children is a choice—one no civilized country should make.