Except the law abbiding citizen doesn't go with his gun on a gfz but someone planning a mass shooting go. And considering the size of USA and that it can't prevent drugs to enter its territory that is massive then a gun restriction would mean only criminals with gun.

For a no gun law to be acceptable you would need to be perfectly sure NO ONE would get a gun (perhaps except training gun for shooting ranges, with non-lethal ammo). If you can't reach that you shall not prohibit legal owners to have it as well.

But all mass shootings started with a law abbiding citizen. At some point in time somehting snaped in them which made them do it. Look at the last shooting the guy was rich and really not someone you would profile as someone who would kill.

Australia is almost the size of USA (minus Alaska) and if anything our borders would be much easier to smuggle drugs and guns in as we can't patrol all the coastline at every point in time.

The difference is most our society don't give a shit about owning guns to protect ourselves. The criminals who have illegal guns generally go shoot other criminals.  We have a ban on automatics and semi automatics and tough regulations around ownership and the need to pay fees since the last shooting massacre in 1996 (excluding family murder suicides since then). Only gun enthusists and farmers really bother owning guns these days, The rest of society doesn't need them and we never feel that our life is in danger when we walk out on the street at any given point in time.

Eerrrr I would have to check the statistics in USA, but in Brazil all guns used in mass shooting and crimes were illegaly obtained and can't be traced. Probably the legal guns/law abidden citizen that go for a mass shooting is guys that want to kill themselves after. I would guess most of those cases if the family really were looking at the person it would be avoided.

Men I had no Idea Australia was that big, I always assumed small country (population isn't very high, right?). And I would guess land borders are worse to patrol than water, radar and others prevent most boats to come unnoticed, but on land anyone can come walking, throwing stuff over distance or making short illegal flights. But I'm no specialist on this, from Brazil what I recall is that we have much worse situation over our land borders than our sea.

Well man, that is the point if you can really be safe and sure that you won't be shot by a criminal in the street most people won't worry about having them (unless it's the culture on the place like USA and Switzerland) and that makes a big difference.

Each country have a different reality.

I was more refering to America what that article was based on. In a developed world coutnry that is meant to be a world leader they shouldn't need guns. however we know the US economy relies on guns to keep afloat lol.

Our country is big but yes small population. Last time I read we have 10 active ships (probably what 50-100 people max on each lol) that patrol about 25,000 kms of coastline lol. Even with radar you could get through somewhere before authorities got to you. The good thing is we are so far away no one really gives a shit. Perhaps when world over populates and some coutnry decides to invate we are screwed lol.

Until there is a lunatic with a military grade assault rifle who mows down dozens of people.

In my entire life I've only known a single person who has been involved in a shooting. And it was more like an acquaintance. None of my neighbours, schoolmates, work colleagues, friends, friends of friends, etc.
Just that one guy. And he brought it on himself because he was highly involved in criminal activities.

No, there is still no problem with guns.  That was a terrible, tragic act by a crazy scumbag.  A lunatic, as you called him. That didn't suddenly make guns a problem.  

But we can also look at the effects gun control reform has had in specific countries, and conclude that it has made a large difference for them.
Australia and the U.K. are two examples. Australia went from having 10 massacres in the 10 years prior to the 1996 gun "ban", to having 0 in the following 20 years. Coincidence, right?

Perhaps guns tbemselves are not yge problem but people with guns are. How many lunatics can get access to military grade automatic weapons in the US. A mass shooting with a pistol is already bad enough, but it being so easy to get weapons intended for slaughter instead of self defense is a big problem from my point of view. I fully supported Obama is laws to ban certain kind of guns. This is not the first or the last mass shooting in US and compared to other rich countries US is gun related murder rate is way higher. In reality weapons only escalate violence  and not somehow decrease it, unless we are talking about nuclear bombs.