Now that some women are contributing, there is some valid input. So ladies, I concede - no more guns than we have now.

However, please note my motivation for writing this article.

1. When I pass a lone young woman in the bush I fear for her safety. I always will.
2. I am a technical person and have had experience with guns. I admire them as technical achievements. A repeating rifle with 1875 stamped on the barrel is as effective as one made this year. With few exceptions once a person (male or female) becomes familiar with guns, they do like the feeling of safety (maybe power) that they imbue.
3. Ever since Howard blew the gun menace out of all proportion, I have been angry about the dishonesty of it all.

Brian's underlying point, though is correct. THere are instances where an Australian should be allowed to have a firearm for protection, because there is a real threat and the firearm may save their life.

You will note that the comments against in this forum all ASSUME the the intention is for lots of people to be armed, almost at random; and subsequently, that those randams then start randomly threatening and shooting people with those guns. We know they will do this, because ordinary people act like this with access to kitchen knives, right? The assumptions are prejudice, not reality.

The fact is there are a small number of Australians murdered every year whose ex-spouses were known to be dangerous, or who carry large amounts of cash, or who have offended organised criminals like bikies. THese people are even agreed by the police to be in danger of their lives, but they must die like sheep for the prejudices of the many.

Good points, Chris and Brian. I too enjoyed the technical aspects of guns and shooting generally (especially reloading).

Funny how so many people look on guns with abhorence yet their eyes skim over something daily without disgust...it's usually parked in their driveway.

Viking, you've just jumped to that silly conclusion gun 'lovers' make all the time. That there can only be those who love guns, who like that cliche: 'it's not guns that kill, but the person using it', and those who abhor them.

Instead, look at this way. There are those who put guns in the same category as kitchen knifes and those who put guns more in the category of cars.

Kitchen knifes can be dangerous, but only when not used for their primary purpose or used by very young children and are necessary daily to cut up and eat food. There is very little skill involved in learning how to use them.

Cars are dangerous, but afford a high degree of convenience. Driving a car requires a degree of skill to use for their primary purpose. It takes proof of a prerequisite number of hours of training, passing a written test and a practical test. Maintenance of license is mandatory, and is easily lost with inappropriate use.

Guns, though of no practical purpose at all in the lives of city/town dwellers, come in the latter category.

Some people loooove cars, some don't, but there is no argument to the licensing requirements and restrictions of when driving is not permissible from the lovers, those lukewarm or those who hate them.

Why on Earth should guns not at least fall in the same category as car driving? Filling out some paperwork, answering some questions too much effort for the privilege of owning a gun? And this from people who claim to appreciate, even love, guns.

Brian, why don't gun owners see that to own such a lethal and powerful item as a gun as a privilege that needs to be earned. Like a driver's license.

yvonne, am I reading you correctly that you ASSUME we shooters are pushing for no gun licencing at all? That isn't actually so. I have been involved for almost 35 years and am perfectly used to licencing. What I can't get used to is being subject to laws founded in widespread moral prejudice instead of knowledge of the matters being regulated.

We would like to have laws designed as non-judgementally as vehicle laws; for instance, we would not need any government busybodies messing with us as long as we confined our usage of firearms to private property. We would also be able to trade between licenced owners without begging bureaucrats for permission and waiting for four to six weeks to get it, instead making a legitimate trade when we want and having 14 days to register the changes.

Although I believe self-defense should be a legitimate reason for licenses, I do not want to see such licenses easy to get - just that a threatened wife or a jeweller have as much right to protection as an ex-police commissioner, politician or multi-millionaire.

Chris Per the problem is that when we give a gun to a person, they may be a nutter but they may have flown under the radar and won't appear that way until they break-out and then the damage is done.

My former neighbour applied for the re-instatement of his gun licence a while back. At one stage in his life, he was a clean skin. But after he threatened people on the street with a gun, put another neighbour through a window and beat his face in for talking to his wife (a sad little individual with a history of abusive partners) had a restaining order put on him by the previous owner, (an old woman) and then stalked my husband we moved in record time ( a safer option than arming ourselves), I'm hoping that he didn't get his licence back - so will the cops who who would be first in the firing line if called out to this guy. Even writing this gives me some anxiety in the unlikely event he sees it - he's certainly up to doing something nasty in revenge.

In his own mind though he is a hero. He told us that he had to go to court after he saved the girl next door (no girl) who had a heart transplant (nope) from a stalker (nope) to explain his brush with the law and honestly believed it. He's still out there.

Luckily he didn't kill someone when he had the gun, but he may have. The people who think they need protection, but really who society needs protection from, may be just as nuts as him. Guns belong in rural situations where they are used for work (though maybe not by my former boss who thought the black snake was a irrigatiion hose - it wouldn't plug in, and then shot the irrigation hose thinking it was a snake) but not in everyday society.