Bondi Beach has brought forth the too simple, not fully fleshed out argument that certain populations love to rejoin when there’s a mass casualty event (MCE) somewhere with strict laws regulating gun ownership. First, I can’t for the life of me understand how we can’t agree, as a society, that 400-650 mass shooting events annually in the U.S. is abhorrent. We should all agree that the tragedy of Bondi Beach is just that; a tragedy. Something that shouldn’t happen. But the truth is, it does whether we like it or not. And there are cases where even in the most tightly regulated countries, MCEs can happen anyway.
Here’s where the “see, gun regulations don’t work” argument worms its way in. And if you stop there, start nodding your head fervently, you’re engaging in a Nirvana Fallacy, or the Fallacy of the Perfect Solution. If you say or have said that particular phrase, let’s examine the fallacy and the true correlations we can see in these countries like Australia, where they experience between 0-1 MCE annually.
First, what is the Nirvana Fallacy? It’s an informal fallacy that describes a solution as imperfect, and therefore should not be implemented. Saying gun regulations don’t work because people are still killed by guns doesn’t take into consideration the high correlation between very, very low MCEs within those areas that have the most strict gun laws, and the very, very high MCEs within those areas, like the U.S., that attempt to limit gun regulations.
Saying we shouldn’t try something because it isn’t perfect fails to to consider that the choices we make do not always fall along a black and white path, and therefore our regulations will certainly have holes. But wouldn’t it make the most sense to fill a few of those bigger holes in our legislation, based on the longitudinal evidence that’s been gathered in other countries with strong gun regulations? Start there, and adjust accordingly as new information becomes available?
Ah, but what about Chicago, you say? Isn’t that proof enough gun laws don’t work here? No.
What Chicago showed is that, in spite of common sense gun laws enacted there, guns kept pouring in from the states around it with weak regulations. So let’s be clear. Based on how our democracy is set up, this fits as a Federal issue. And there should be Federal laws enacted that cover the bare minimum needed to quickly and severely decrease the amount of gun violence we have in America. States can enact more strict laws if their voters indicate for that, but never less.
Every single one of the 46,000 deaths from gun violence each year deserve our agreement to enact the bare minimum. That will stop guns as being the number one cause of death in children. The bare minimum that will allow these numbers to plummet, while still considering there will be failures.
But if, within the failures, we see data that reflect significant decreases in overall deaths, isn’t that a measure of success? Australia’s deaths by gun violence was 0.9 per 100,000 last year, where America’s was 14 per 100,000. Think of that as 14 people in every single city of 100,000 people were killed by gun violence. Chances are, you know someone that’s been affected by gun violence whether you live in the Midwest, the deep South, or New York City. Which one looks like the failure?
“A significant decline in firearm deaths was observed following the introduction of stringent gun laws in 1996. The study confirms and extends previous findings that no mass shootings have taken place in Australia since 1996, whereas 13 such massacres had occurred in the previous 17 years.” – NIH
Obviously, in light of Bondi Beach, the numbers above will change. Slightly. Instead of zero in thirteen years, it’s one. In those same thirteen years in the U.S., while the numbers have fluctuated, there are reports that gun violence was as much as 63 times more prevalent. That’s exponentially greater than Australia’s. The rate of gun ownership is 12 per 100 in Australia, and 101.5 per 100 in the U.S. Sheer availability alone contributes to these increases.
I really like the way Fallacy Man put it:
“if you are going to argue that something should be abandoned because it is imperfect, then you must simultaneously propose a more effective alternative.” This is the final piece to my argument against saying, “look, see gun laws don’t work because of Bondi Beach.” Or Chicago, or Florida, or Vegas, or Texas…
Instead, let’s look at this from an evidence-based point of view. There is strong evidence that solid gun laws, including the type, who can own them, how they are able to get access to those, etc. significantly reduces deaths from gun violence. Lackluster or spotty laws have shown to increase the amount of gun violence in those areas. The research is there, and it is absolutely worth trying. The Constitution was meant to be a living document, and for good reason.
Nothing in life is an absolute; we don’t have to be on opposite sides of this fence. And I would argue not only do we not have to be, but we shouldn’t be. I really believe, if politicians and lobbyists dropped this as a wedge issue, most Americans would vote for common sense laws that verifiably and significantly, both statistically and effectively, reduce violence caused by guns.
Please stop using traumatic events as a way to further the wedge. That’s what they want us to do. Use these tragedies as reasons to do better, to evolve, to change how we regulate things for the betterment of our society, possibly of our species. We can be better. We can do better. All those victims of gun violence that have thus far been effectively ignored deserve for us to do better.
References
Brown P. Impact of gun law reforms on rates of homicide, suicide and mass shootings in Australia. Evid Based Ment Health. 2017 Feb;20(1):25. doi: 10.1136/eb-2016-102555. Epub 2016 Dec 7. PMID: 27927690; PMCID: PMC10688419.
https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/06/20/the-nirvana-fallacy-an-imperfect-solution-is-often-better-than-no-solution/ Retrieved 2025/12/15.
https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-06/draft_of_trends_issues_paper_mass_shootings_and_firearm_control_comparing_australia_and_the_united_states_submitted_to_peer_review.pdf Retrieved 2025/12/15.
Leave a comment