As I said previously, for every act of violence, whether it's suicide or a mass shooting, whatever the case may be, there is always an intervention point. That person has been failed by whomever, whether it's the person closest to them, a service provider or even those whose job it is to ensure that person's safety. They have failed in intervening.
I don't think that a gun ban against legal owners is the right solution. We also know, as I said, that only 10% of the references for the PAL licence to own a firearm are checked. Why is that? If we have an issue with domestic violence, a woman is concerned for her safety and her partner has a firearm, why would all the references not be checked? Why would they not be checked to get the licence and to renew the licence?
If the partner signs the application, that's deemed as their consent and they're not even contacted to get feedback. I'm surprised, actually, that it is this way considering we're so homed in on firearm regulation. Why is it that those references are not 100% checked? What I was informed of in the safety course is that those references would all be checked to ensure that I was a safe enough person to attain that licence.