As I drove up to the site of the awful home invasion in Torrington today, I found myself thinking — as so many locals are right now — about guns, freedom, and the strange divide in how we talk about both in this country.
Years ago, I was engaged to a US Marine. He had a loaded handgun in the bedside drawer, another sitting on top of the fridge, and a rifle propped behind the couch.
I hated it. I thought it was unnecessary, reckless, and frankly ridiculous. I assumed the most likely outcome was not heroism or thwarting a burglar, but him accidentally shooting himself after getting too excited during a Yankees game.
To me, guns in a city apartment represented paranoia more than protection.
But out here, guns have a point. They aren’t unnecessary, or reckless, and definitely not ridiculous.
Because places like Torrington are different to Terrey Hills. There are no police around the corner. There is no guarantee anyone will hear you scream. Neighbours can be kilometres away. Police are much further.
When something terrible happens, you are often alone for a very long time.
And suddenly the abstract argument about firearms becomes intensely practical.
Of course people in isolated communities want the means to defend themselves. Of course they do. The further you live from immediate help, the more self-reliance stops being a political slogan and becomes a daily reality.
There will be much said in the coming days about the incident at Torrington and the right to defend oneself. By all accounts, this appears to be a clear-cut case of self-defence. Police have already indicated the 75-year-old victim is unlikely to face charges, and rightly so. Few Australians would argue a person should simply surrender themselves to a violent intruder in their own home, particularly not one who has already stabbed you, stabbed your partner, and is coming back for another go.
But the conversation this tragedy has opened is larger than one incident.
Australia has long defined itself in opposition to America when it comes to guns. We tell ourselves we are more sensible, more restrained, less obsessed with individual rights. And, in many ways, our gun laws have served us well. Most Australians support them.
But sometimes our public conversation drifts into a kind of comfortable metropolitan certainty — the assumption that nobody really “needs” a firearm, that only extremists or fantasists care deeply about gun ownership, and that dependence on the state for protection and security is sufficient everywhere.
It is not sufficient everywhere.
Torrington is 25 minutes from the nearest police officer and 30 minutes from the nearest hospital. People who live there have to be self-sufficient. Of course they do.
Freedom looks different in rural Australia than it does in inner-city suburbs.
Freedom in the city means being free to walk the streets and enjoy your many luxuries without needing to defend it yourself.
In places like Torrington, freedom often means the ability to survive without immediate assistance. It means accepting that responsibility for your safety may rest solely with you – and potentially for a very long time, before and help or authorities can arrive.
That reality deserves acknowledgment, even from people who remain deeply uneasy around guns.
Often times when people talk about freedom in this country they are talking about the opposite. They want the freedom to be offensive, to hurt people, and to make others less free by their actions.
But true freedom is freedom from fear.
The truth is that most rural gun owners are not American-style zealots dreaming about government tyranny, or Sovereign Citizens shooting at anyone who so much as comes down their driveway. They are good people with a legitimate need, respecting the weapon and keeping it – safely, legally – for its valid purpose.
Supporting strict gun laws and understanding why rural Australians value firearms are not mutually exclusive positions. In fact, refusing to understand that there is nuance in this subject only deepens the cultural divide between urban and regional Australia.
Perhaps the lesson from Torrington is not that Australia should become America. It absolutely should not.
But neither should we dismiss the instinct for self-defence as something irrational, primitive, or morally suspect. The desire to protect your home, your family, and your own life is one of the most basic human impulses there is.
Even people who dislike guns can understand that.
End rant.
Dr RK (Kath) Crosby is the CEO of research and strategy company KORE CSR, former strategist for the Australian Democrats, and holds a PhD in political behaviour. She is also a well known migraine and health advocate, and the Publisher of New England Times and North Coast Times.
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.