Gun laws

In supporting his dramatic tightening of  'access to firearms' legislation following the Port Arthur shootings (perpetrated by yet another complete 'wacko')... John Howard omitted any reference to the strong element of  political opportunism which drove his actions at that time.

If he was so passionate about gun control legislation, why had he not initiated any such move before the Tasmanian tragedy?

He accepted the kudos of a public still reeling from the shock of that atrocious event... yet deprived only law-abiding citizens who were a soft and vulnerable target. Why nothing at all aimed at preventing  gangsters and other criminal elements from arming themselves to the teeth with even military strength armaments? They still appear to have no difficulty whatsoever in gaining access to the weaponry they deem necessary to support their nefarious activities... and probably run a prosperous business in on-selling so-called banned weapons to any member of the public with an imagined need for such equipment and deep enough pockets to pay for the service.

If I was Mr. Howard, I'd shut up about my supposed past political acumen, lest someone starts to ponder whether perhaps past political 'grand-standing' combined with failure to close obvious loop-holes, possibly facilitated many of the gun-related homicides which have occurred since 'Port Arthur'?