The Guardian has the details on the president's ire:
“When Australia had a mass killing – I think it was in Tasmania – about 25 years ago, it was just so shocking the entire country said ‘well we’re going to completely change our gun laws’, and they did. And it hasn’t happened since.”
In the wake of the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, when Martin Bryant shot and killed 35 people and wounded 23, prime minister John Howard pushed through laws banning automatic, semi-automatic and pump action guns, and enacted a comprehensive gun buy-back scheme, despite strong opposition from parts of the Australian community.Gun buy-back is a fuzzy euphemism for confiscation.
And the article ends with this:
Obama also lamented the rush of Americans who go and buy firearms after US shootings and the “extremely strong” grip the powerful lobby group the National Rifle Association has on Congress.Gee Mr. President, maybe people won't go out and rush to buy guns if you weren't up there talking about how great laws that confiscated all semi-automatic rifles and pump action shotguns were. Especially after a shooting where the murderous mutant used a handgun.
It kinda makes people not trust your good intentions.
Who also points out:
A surprise to no one, it turns out that compliance with New York’s SAFE Act is practically non-existent. They can erect their utopian laws, but it doesn’t mean we have to go along with their scheme. Even when registration was tried in Canada, the compliance rate was low.