Donate to the NRA in March 24th!

[montana]

In Australia there are 760,000 registered gun owners in a population of 24 million. All guns must be registered so that is an accurate snapshot of gun ownership. That's only 3% of the population compared to the USA. Unsure what the USA percentage of ownership would be but obviously a lot more, does 25% sound reasonable? Gun ownership is perceived in not only Australian legislation but also daily life as a privilege, not a right. I cannot speak for the UK but it is likely to be similar. The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (SSAA) is the largest lobby group and general organisational hub for many shooters. There is an active anti-gun movement in Australia and the mainstream media tend to be anti-gun in their coverage (they are certainly not pro-gun). The majority of the rest of the population is ambivalent to ownership. Frankly, most Australian shooters believe in the concept of privilege and that common sense restrictions are in the Community's interests. I certainly do, because I don't want school shootings to occur and believe more guns is a less efficient way of keeping society safe than less guns. We don't want guns in the hands of fruit cakes and are prepared to forgo ownership to live peacefully. As you know I love my guns and am in an privileged position with certain types however for the rest of the community it's bolt guns only and relatively few have access to semi-auto's.

The main events that have led to changes in this privilege have been the 1996 mass murder at port Arthur in Tasmania (35 killed by an intellectually disabled guy wielding an unlicensed AR15) and the 2000 Monash University shooting (Chinese student on a student visa shot 2 and wounded 2 in the classroom with a licensed handgun). On both occasions the then Prime Minister John Howard, who is a staunch anti-gunner used the situation as a catalyst for the tightening of gun ownership. No more high-power semi-auto's unless carefully vetted in a couple of States only. Handguns were always heavily restricted but 10rd limited mags, calibre limited to 9mm and min barrel length introduced. Both situations were 'managed' by a mandatory gun buy-back of guns that were no longer permitted. Most shooters surrendered their banned guns and used the money to buy bolt and level actions. The total number of guns in Australia actually increased, just the type that are most efficient to commit mass murder have been culled.

I see something similar on the horizon in the USA. It will be the type of guns that will be restricted, not ownership per-se. And given they are entrenched in your culture there will be much resistance and might never happen. But, if all the planets align; a President's like Hillary in charge and a more than usual number of mass murders and it might just happen. More likely incrementally and on a state level. Death of a thousand cuts.

Thank you for your honest opinion Klem. Nobody wants crazy or even irresponsible people to have guns. Mass shootings are not the failure of guns per se, but of parenting, a dysfunctional culture and system. The problem of true dialog preventing killings is not the anti's agenda, but the force acceptance of gun confiscation under the pretext of public safety. There could be a very real way to vette individuals for firearm safety and ownership without gun registration or prohibitions. Once an individual is vetted through required training and conduct, that person should never be prohibited from carrying or owning any firearm unless that said person violates a criminal law. The problem is, our gun rights are our birth right and we as a people are suppose to be innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Punishing the whole for the misdeeds of the few is the excuse every tyrant has used to obtain and abuse power. Watch the video "Innocence betrayed".https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN0Xi8no6us
This will explain why our founding fathers were way ahead of their time. They understood human behavior better than most do today. When a police officer or soldier murders an innocent, the public doesn't demand all police or military personnel be disarmed. They demand justice be served to the individuals who broke the law and those entrusted to it. The same logic should be given to gun owners. Thinking the anti gun movement is just about public safety is very naive. This is about power and who gets to wield it.