Didn't miss much, Queen; Chit and Mant are berating one another.
As for the "US is a special snowflake," it kinda is, in this regard. Each nation is unique, you can't just apply the laws of one nation to another, it won't work unless the laws are incredibly narrow in scope and small in effect. The US is, first and foremost, a huge country, in terms of pure land mass. We're around 25% larger (the US clocks in at 9,826,675 sq. km, whereas Australia is 7,692,024 sq. km), and that's not an insignificant size difference. That's a LOT of area to police, and also a LOT of area in which to hide from the police. Hell, we've still got reasonably successful moonshine (illegal liquor) operations going on, nowadays.
America has a population of approximately 317,000,000 people. If 1% of the population were part of a dedicated anti-gun taskforce, that'd 3,170,000 people spread out across 9,826,675 square kilometers, or one man patrolling an area of around 3.1 square kilometers; not an insignificant area for a single person to attempt to control. That's just the patrolmen; this isn't taking account to the people needed to get the necessary supplies to the patrolmen like food and water, the people needed to keep all their equipment running, the team (or teams) of people coordinating all the necessary logistics, communication personnel, and so on. It'd be a huge undertaking.
The gun laws we have work reasonably well when adequately enforced. We do not need legislation like Australia or the UK. What we need is better enforcement, and for loopholes in unlicensed gun acquisition to be closed. This is far, FAR simpler and doesn't tread on not just an amendment to the Constitution, and by extension the Constitution itself, but the Bill of Rights, something many people consider to be a document of almost equal importance to the Bible. To enforce near-draconian gun control legislation would require the removal of one of the founding rights of our nation, something that's been backed up by generation after generation of legal precedent. Again, that's only if you could find a way to adequately enforce it, which would be a logistical nightmare.
The thing is, you dont.
America is an extremely large, and very populated country. This does make certain things logistically difficult, but does not make anything impossible. The thing that astounds me is how the current state of America drowning in guns is seen as a valid excuse to not do anything about the problem.
With just the current level of law enforcement, things can be changed. Decent gun control laws dont magically cause firearms to pop out of existence, but they do limit the purchase there of. One would say start with making gun sales illegal. This allows everyone to keep their guns, but dramatically hampers anyone trying to get new guns. Then institute a program promoting that people turn in their guns for destruction at police stations.
Both of those are incredibly easy to enforce, and will have a dramatic effect and reduction on gun related violence over time. You dont need police going round collecting everyone's guns. That would be stupid. However, making the trade and sale of firearms restricted allows for police to collect firearms when they happen upon them.
There are so many simple legal solutions that will greatly assist the police in their duties, and that will reduce gun violence while not stopping guns from being sold at all. Literally something as simple as a firearms registry. I know Americans are all paranoid about the government knowing where all the gun owners are, but they already know where all the car drivers are so really it is not something to get worked up over. Something as simple as a linking a gun to a persons ID number, and making all unregistered firearms illegal. Provide a window period for registration, and make registration during that period either free or cost less than ammo. (personally though, I feel if you can afford a gun you can afford to pay for the things registration)
With just that legislation, police can over time confiscate any unregistered firearms reducing the number of guns in the country, and the registration process make gun purchases more responsible. With the gun registration, police would theoretically also have access to the ballistic information of the guns which could help them solve crimes committed with stolen firearms.
These suggestions do not violate the second amendment, they are not readily open to abuse, require no extra manpower or cost, would help the police in their duties and will influence the gun violence problem in America. I encourage those who support gun ownership to provide a definitive flaw in my proposal.
One last little bit:
Most gun laws introduced since Sany hook have loosened gun laws.
