@Suseonline, Monday, 16 June 2014 10:27:08 AM, "..whatever the Aussie gun laws are now are good enough for me"

How can you expect to be taken seriously when you freely admit you have no knowledge of the firearms laws, you are obviously unwilling to even educate yourself on them and you flaunt your own ignorant opinions?

While I am a staunch supporter of compulsory voting, you are one of the truly ignorant exceptions who should be excused from ever casting a ballot. To think that I have always argued against those who say that people should pass some simple civics and comprehension test before voting.

Oh dear, firearm assisted suicide, is just as easy with a single shot 22, as it is with a thousand rounds a minute, mini gun!
One single bullet is usually plenty, and I suspect, very difficult, with a bullet in the brain, to chamber and fire an additional round, even with the assistance of a SLR!
Many of the gun crimes committed in any country, are carried out with, never ever registered, illegal firearms.
I suspect, a Bryant, in say a packed theatre, could do as much or more damage, beheading fleeing patrons, with an expertly wielded razor sharp Sumuri sword, as he did in Port Arthur, with an SLR, fired at virtual point blank range?
The cowering restaurant patrons, even gave him time to reload, when perhaps a pot of boiling hot coffee, flung in his face, would have effectively disarmed him!?
The problem wasn't the choice of weapon, just the hands holding it! Ditto the Washington sniper, using a bolt action rifle, to also mass murder!
As someone who once operated as a professional shooter, culling feral animals, I now along with almost every other former professional shooter, refuse to ply this old trade!
Why? because I can no longer guarantee a humane kill.
I mean, something as small as a leaf waving in the breeze, can alter the trajectory, and instead of a clean kill, a badly wounded animal takes off, before one can chamber another round manually; meaning, a badly wounded animal, can suffer for many hours, before it can be finally, humanely dispatched!
Why we could have simply limited Automatic weapons, to say five round magazines.
Now there's something we could have the states follow, along with a restricted persons register, including people like Bryant, whose IQ, borders on the moronic!
This one measure, would have saved many lives.
As long as weapons can be manufactured in home sheds, someone will sell/buy illegal firearms.
And as long as someone can manufacture them, others will buy them, just as they do, in considerably much more law abiding, won't say bum for sixpence, Japan!
Rhrosty.

As always, whenever this topic is raised, someone judging others on their, what I would do in your shoes, patently flawed personal standards, starts accusing legal gun owners, of enjoying killing for killings sake!
That is, without a shadow of a doubt, a monstrous and emotive lie!
Yes, there are some immature kids, a tiny minority, who should never ever be allowed to own or use firearms, without proper prerequisite professional training.
Ditto untrained ultra permissive parents, the place where errant behavior with guns usually starts, as learned by exampled behavior!?
And law abiding owners are usually more incensed than almost anybody, at the sight of shot up signs, or worse, gut shot animals, left to die most cruelly, by patently spoiled kids, who are doted on by ultra permissive parents, who then go on to offend, by mixing guns and alcohol, and also quite often, high powered motor vehicles!
These are also those often also very immature irresponsible parents that also buy underage kids, their equally illegal alcohol!?
All given to them, when they are little more than a pair of walking gonads!
Firearms are merely useful tools in the right hands, and only dangerous to others, in the wrong ones!
I mean, this sort of behavior starts with air rifles, and the killing of harmless birds/ magpies, which is also, followed by other forms of character altering, animal cruelty, which is all too often, a precursor to other forms of even worse cruelty, culminating in things like baby and or elder bashing.
As I said, it is not the firearm that is legally held, just the hands holding it.
Ditto dogs breed for hunting!
And if there's a case for restricting legal firearms, then there's an absolutely compelling case for removing illegal ones.
However, good luck with that, fact and evidence avoiding anti gun lobbyists, one and all!
Rhrosty

onthebeach your just going to have to rake my word for it just I as I take your word your not a 12 year old living at home still. I've shot sheep and cattle, abotiors gun is more effective and cheaper.

Now back to the point why are you missing the point. We have not had any mass killings since the guns laws were changed. Is that a true statement or not.
The next point is what if not the guns laws changes has caused this to happen?

We are not talking about 30 deaths over 5 years we are talking about 4 or more deaths in one hit

Also "onthebeach" the semi and automatic thing was inserted into my reply becasue that is were the author is headed. if you can have a semi why not an auto, hell why not a chain fed 50 cal machine gun as some state in the US allow

So someone wants to know what people need in the way of guns that they can't get under the present laws?

1) The best form of .22 rifle for hunting rabbits when there are a lot of them, (we live in AUSTRALIA) is the semiautomatic .22. This is a small sporting rifle, very popular and freely available even in almost every country of the world.

Of the 800,000 licensed shooters in Australia, perhaps 50,000 of them are primary producers and can go to stupid lengths of bureaucracy to get one. The rest abolutely are banned from owning them, despite the fatuous claims that 'they are not banned'.

2) Similarly, the best way to manage the recoil of a shotgun for hunting or vermin shooting is to buy a semiauto shotgun like the Remington 1100. Same story. They are 100% sporting arms, nothing military about them at all. Only those same 50,000 can get them at huge cost, and not at the same time as a semiauto .22. Similarly for pump actions.

3) A number of people in this country are at immediate risk of murder, having offended bikies or drug dealers, or carrying cash, or being the target of a mentally ill (or divorced) person's obsession. One very helpful tool for reducing that risk is a firearm in hand. That is absolutely impossible; it is defined out of the law. Names can easily be named of people known at risk by the Police, who were killed despite police knowledge of their danger.

These obstacles to using normal firearms for normal jobs are created out of a dishonest public debate.

The safety almost all of us live in is dishonestly defined as applying to every Australian, so personal protection is removed from genuine reasons in law.

Activists and academics dishonestly defined the problem as 'automatic and semi-automatic firearms', thus mixing the vast majority of good rabbit rifles and sporting shotguns with a tiny few military weapons and binning them all in a wave of self-righteousness

David, so by your logic, let's loosen the gun laws, allow people to have semi-automatic and self loading weapons, and then we'll know for sure whether the Australian gun laws are working or make no difference.

I'm sorry but the point you are trying to make is completely fatuous.