Editorial: Gun control in US requires an attitude shift

America has long had a reputation of wanting to police the world. It is well past time it policed itself. Photo / iStock

Gun sales in the US have increased. Requests for access to courses at shooting ranges are up. Students from at least one Christian school have been encouraged to arm themselves. A New York Times editorial (the first the paper has carried on its front page since 1920) calling for stricter gun controls has had holes shot in it - literally. And a politician sent her Christmas greetings complete with a family photo with five adults and four young children - including her grandson - showing off their guns.

Why is this type of reaction to last week's mass shootings in the US no surprise? What is the peculiar irrationality that grips so many Americans when it comes to firearms?

The Times editorial, headlined "The gun epidemic", suggested reducing the number of guns and "eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition". It turned its sights on the country's now famous second amendment, too: "It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation." All reasonable points, one would have thought.

Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr also had a view for those who wondered whether in this digital age page one of the print edition still had power: "... the front page remains an incredibly strong and powerful way to surface issues that demand attention. And, what issue is more important than our nation's failure to protect its citizens?" (Closer to home, the overwhelmingly positive reaction from readers to this paper's front page on Friday - "Who will end this madness" - amply demonstrated Mr Sulzberger's point).

From this distance, most can but wonder how some form of stricter gun controls have not already been adopted in the US. Yes, the strength of the gun lobby is well known and, obviously by some politicians, feared. "Guns don't kill people: people kill people" has been a common refrain for many years. There is some little truth to that response, but it is in reality a weak argument.

Australia proved in the wake of the Port Arthur massacre that, even in the face of a powerful gun lobby, stricter controls can be implemented, including restrictions on certain types of weapons and vetting of gun licence holders. Regulations alone, however, are not enough. To win this battle, the US needs to win the hearts and minds of its people towards guns and gun control. It is a matter of changing attitudes - much as own our society's positions towards drink-driving, wearing seatbelts and even smoking have become far less tolerant.

There is a debate happening in this country about access to firearms, too. That discussion will only intensify here. While many of us - especially those who believe in the concept of personal responsibility - rue the attitude of introducing legislation to try to cover every eventuality, in this case in the US saner heads must prevail. As for the suggestions of some the solution is to further arm the populace? That is, quite frankly, lunacy. America has long had a reputation of wanting to police the world. It is well past time it policed itself.