Comment Re:regulation? (Score 1) 245
Your arguments are rational, sane, and I agree with most of what you said. (WTF am I doing here?)
There's the bit about "Aus" and "rights-restricting" that needs clarifying. 1. most of the recent firearms ownership laws came about because a nutjob killed a lot of innocent people at Port Arthur. Said nutjob was able to get hold of a semi-automatic rifle to perform his tragic deeds. Subsequent firearm restriction received almost universal support from both sides of politics, i.e. our democratically elected representatives debated, adjusted, and passed these laws. That's the people speaking. 2. You've forgotten that the USA constitution doesn't apply to other countries, i.e. there is no "right" to firearm ownership in Australia's constitution, so it's pointless talking about firearms ownership rights in that context.
FWIW, I own a WWII vintage Lee-Enfield 303. I have a licence for it, as required under my state's laws. I probably don't need to keep it. I could justify it by saying it's for protection from wild dogs - I live in a rural area and keep some animals - and that claim is easily supported by the number of baiting programs carried out around here, but really, it's just fun to take to the range once in a while.