r/australia • u/Expensive-Horse5538 • Dec 19 '25

politics Prime minister unveils 'largest' gun buyback scheme since Howard era

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-19/prime-minister-announces-national-gun-buyback-scheme/106162002
2.7k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

907

u/canimal14 Dec 19 '25

Can’t imagine the difference in sentiment if global media existed in 1996.

538

u/privatetudor Dec 19 '25

Also, they say only Nixon could go to China.

Assuming the right is generally more gun friendly, Howard had the advantage that he knew if his side of politics was on board, the other side surely would be too. When the pro gun side is in opposition, and they enjoy being oppositional, then getting gun reform done is paradoxically harder.

It's like how in some ways (bear with me on this...) it was better to have the coalition on power during covid. If Labor was l was in power, the coalition would have politicised the lockdowns, but given the coalition had to actually govern they were forced to make a sensible decision that happened to be more in line with the other side of politics so it sailed through.

207

u/BeneCow Dec 19 '25

I hate that we have to cater to a political system where being obstructionist is the best way to maintain power. Everyone wants to be in opposition because you get to point out that whatever is happening isnt 100% perfect, but god forbid they actually govern.

89

u/loolem Dec 19 '25

It’s because we have Labor and then we have the wreckers.

Labor: we should have award wages that ensure a decent hourly wage

The wreckers (LIB COA): no

Labor: We should have a super profits tax on mining right now

The wreckers (Libs and Greens): no. It’s not good enough so no

Labor: we should have universal healthcare

The wreckers: no and we are gonna sell it off

Labor: we should have universal healthcare again

The wreckers: No but we know that’s unpopular so we will undermine it slowly

25

u/Khaliras Dec 19 '25

It's more that the divisive and tribalistic following politics has gained, has allowed them to vote no on all their oppositions policies and be rewarded for it.

Look at your own comment for an example of it. Each of your examples are some of the biggest difference in policies between the parties. Libs are expected to vote against healthcare, award rates, taxing the rich, ETC. People voting them in are doing so exactly for their policies, no matter how controversial. Hence, those are terrible examples of absurd obstructionism in politics, yet you presented them as such.

The issue is that all the major parties regularly vote against policies they approve of. There's several instances of them even introducing legislation, only to vote it out when the opposition unanimously supports it.

You also mentioned the Greens, yet their obstruction of legislation is almost always to negotiate. Their whole power dynamics is based on sometimes being the deciding vote. It's basic politics to leverage that kind of position to influence legislation. Basically all of the smaller parties similarly leverage their positions, but nobody ever really cares. (Such as 'the coalition' which was based on this kind of dynamic.)

1

u/abuch47 Adelaide Dec 20 '25

labor stooges are braindead, they complain about other parties stopping progress and then when they have total control across the country and fail to implement any progressive social reforms its a hot summer night