leoj: "Now, what about you read what I have written about the informed, risk-based, evidence-based REGULATION:

- of the person with a single licence (or two if pistols must be separately licensed for emotional reasons); and,

- of types of firearms through controls on importation.

Both existed before and after Howard. They are the only effective and robust controls. All else lies in policing (which includes Customs inspections) - which has been compromised by the 'gun control' emphasis that wrongly directs police resources against the compliant, licensed citizens.
=
So what you are seeking to change is not the Howard controls (as is the gun hobbyist Is Mise) but stupid police actions in raiding compliant gun holders without first glancing at their paperwork. No change in the rules. Much ado about nothing unless there's another agenda hiding in the background like wanting to revert to the rules before Howard that delivered the Port Arthur massacre and a long string of gun massacres before it.

And your "before and after Howard" was merely an innocent slip of the keyboard. Before Howard means be ready to seek cover and after Howard means you won't be caught in a gun massacre.

EmperorJulian,

I want informed, risk-based, evidence-based laws across the board and not just where firearms are concerned.

Although the Howard-inspired 'gun control' is a perfect example of what any democracy should be attempting to avoid, which is cynical politics from both sides of government and sheer damned laziness and gutlessness of politicians.

Other than what I have written on the subject I don't know what might convince you of the fraud that is the imported political spin that is 'gun control'. Maybe if you, others too, would care to read up on the use of the Hegelian Paradigm in rhetoric. It is a very powerful propaganda, where you work back from what you want and devise (invent) a problem and causes for which the solution is (you guessed it) that original outcome/situation you sought. I will leave it at that. I am not going to be banging my head up against a brick wall trying to convince anyone who is not open to argument.

In closing though I would like you to know that I have never met anyone among farmers, the recreational hunters who visited our properties and target shooters who does not have the common good, the good of the public and Australia at heart and constantly in mind.

It is ridiculous to assert as the political spin of 'gun control' does that its activists (and the billionaire backers behind it) have the secret and the many thousands of respectable, responsible, licensed firearms owners do not. If there is one thing that all might take from this thread is that.

contd..
Now, just ask yourself why those few hidden 'gun control' activists that are beavering away getting Soros' and ors Hegelian propaganda into the media are so damned secretive that they refuse to publish ever the very basic information about themselves, their backers, any overseas links, any political links and (claimed) membership. But they ARE very forward in putting the begging bowl out for public donations. Again, no information, no due diligence on where the money goes and no auditing.

However we are all assured that our firearms licensed Aussies are decent law-abiding people and they, unlike those highly secretive 'gun control' activists, have their jealously protected licenses to prove it.

You referred to Is Mise. If Is Mise is prepared to show me his firearms licence and I have no doubt that he has his Categogy H although the A would be enough and I would be more than willing, utterly confident, to leave my wallet in his care. My children are older now but he could have baby sat them too. How many here for example have ever passed similar screening and maintained your clean character as they must do? Some of us have had high level screening as contractors for government and I can say to you that citizens like Is Mise have satisfied the equivalent.

Can you say that the activists and those overseas promoters of that politically loaded and damned useless for deterring and catching crims 'gun control' might pass even low level screening?

Honestly there is so much political spin about and the media will not invest in investigative journalism. With a ready market of dumbed-down 'Useful Idiots' they don't have do anything but entertain (and poorly).

Samantha Lee of Gun Control Australia not only has links to George Soros but worked for him.

The 33500 Yanks shot dead by other Yanks every year are not a problem invented by George Soros (whoever he is), they're on public record. Bang, you're dead, 33500 times. Open slather for gunnies and its consequences are responsible. The Slave-owners' and Injun-hunters' Second Amendment and its origins are also on record. Hard evidence.

There might be a few thousand people, tops, in Australia who want a return to pre-Howard anarchy, but most of the 24 MILLION people in Australia don't want it. Most of us can enjoy recreation without having to kill anything. Fishers, shooters and hunters parties are a minuscule demographic aberration in this country, gaining a voice only in the gerrymandered Senate. The gun freaks are no more than a noisy minority.

Thankfully the armed arseholes in the criminal fraternity who have been illegally importing guns are only killing other criminals who are no loss, but the pre-Howard record of domestic violence perpetrators massacring family members with guns is pretty damning.

Julian,

Are there no criminals killing other criminals in your American totals?

I grant you it was brave policemen at the Lindt cafe, but their presence and their guns are what stopped Monis, the gun laws failed, Monis had an illegal weapon, moreover, a weapon that had been shortened illegally.

Are you in favour of Uniform National Gun Laws?

I am.