That's why it's a joke when Democrats say stupid stuff like "Australian Gun Laws on the Table" and our media makes it a headline.
No. That law is NOT on the table. Not now or as long as we have the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. Australia does not have a 2nd amendment. Australia does not have the legal precedence of interpretation of a 2nd amendment. Australia does not have the Federalist papers would helped define WHAT the 2nd Amendment means and why it is part of our Constitutaion.
Australia, Denmark, Switzerland, England, France.... none of that matters. They don't have our Constitution.
If we are going to have an intelligent debate about gun control than that conversation has to START AND INCLUDE the 2nd Amendement of the Constitution. If it doesn't, I really can't take you seriously.
Now I have said before on another thread about another mass shooting. I would be in favor of a limit on magazine size for guns. I think that law, if reasonable, would hold up to judicial scrutiny vs. the 2nd Amendment. We can debate that, but I think it's a reasonable position.
Same with discussing minimum ages for some types of guns. Or training requirements. Or better background check procedures. Or better red flags for kids in high school that show violent tendencies and delaying their ability to buy guns until 25 or something.
I think there is some wiggle room to TRY legislation. No law is permenent. There was a time some AR style weapons were illegal. The country survived. All the things you'd WANT to do as gun owner you still could. The pendulum can swing on gun control and not completely undermine the 2nd amendment.