A rare attack ? So a once in a 20 years attack that kills 50 people and injures many more shouldn't have an influence on gun control ?
I reckon you might want to word that better next time.
Gun enthusiasts still have access to guns in Australia. Sure, the rules tightened post Port Arthur but if you're a shooter in Australia you can still enjoy your sport.
While it won't have any effect on criminals with guns, if it means there is at least some kind of screening then that has to be a good thing, doesn't it ? If assault rifles aren't available is that really a problem ?
If an enthusiast wants to own several guns, then a bit more scutiny isn't a problem, is it ? I know a few people that have multiple guns because they are competitive shooters. They aren't concerned about it.
Normal sensible people who enjoy shooting for a sport are still able to do their thing.
