[quote=CFrance;838434]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexaninVA
A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Australia and that no individual may possess them. While it's true that Australia has restrictive firearms laws, rifles and shotguns (including semi-automatic), as well as handguns are all legal within a narrow set of criteria.
the federal government and the states and territories agreed to a uniform approach to firearms regulation, including a ban on certain semiautomatic and self-loading rifles and shotguns, standard licensing and permit criteria, storage requirements and inspections, and greater restrictions on the sale of firearms and ammunition. Firearms license applicants are required to take a safety course and show a “genuine reason” for owning a firearm, which could not include self-defense. The reasons for refusing a license would include “reliable evidence of a mental or physical condition which would render the applicant unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm.” A waiting period of twenty-eight days would apply to the issuing of both firearms licenses and permits to acquire each weapon.
A common-sense approach, IMO.
|
It's reasonable to say it's a common sense approach and I respect that. However, at least under the law at present, an Australian approach would be unconstitutional and that ...thankfully ... still matters.
I also note that with the "authorities" able to decide who gets to own a firearm and who does not, and given that self-defense is not a legitimate reason per the Aussies, that's completely unacceptable in the US. This is exacerbated by an erosion of trust in "the authorities" in recent years where for examples, statues passed by congress and signed by the president in to law are later changed seemingly on a whim to meet a political need. Why should we trust in that?