Neither is there with the other end of the spectrum. Here we find the handful of real enthusiasts who take every opportunity to go hunting, and work themselves half to death while out in the field to ensure they always fill their bag limits. In other words, the greater proportion of the firearms 'out there', are virtually never used at all. And so, they pose virtually no risk at all. And so, the expenditure of vast amounts of money, presumably in the public interest, to remove them, will offer no significant increase in safety at all.
Significance is what it is all about.
For example, consider the most common forms of premature death in the community. I understand that in Australia each and every week, more women die of breast cancer than the total number of persons who died in the Port Arthur tragedy. At well over fifty times the death toll per year, it makes me angry to contemplate how much better value for money could have been achieved with the amount collected via the special gun buy-back Medicare levy. As a taxpayer, I believe I have a right to be angry about this, yet the media seem unable to comprehend this scandal. And despite the rhetoric, it seems that, individually, the states are neither really committed to making firearms laws genuinely uniform, nor to affording properly licenced interstate shooters uniformly reciprocal visiting rights.