Senator David Leyonhjelm wants to reopen the debate on self-defence and access to weapons in the wake of the fatal siege, which saw 17 hostages held for 16 hours by gunman Man Haron Monis.
The pro-gun Liberal Democrat said the hostages were left helpless, due to the fact they could not lawfully carry weapons into the Lindt café.
The Shooters and Fishers Party have also distanced themselves from Senator Leyonhjelm’s comments, with one politician saying they conflicted with party policy.
NSW MLC Robert Borsak told SBS that increased access to weapons or the ability to carry a concealed gun would not have saved the victims of the deadly siege.
‘If they had pulled their finger out and got those bail laws operational quickly, this man would have not been on the streets’
“The reality is that this man was a criminal,” he said.
“He should have been in jail on remand... We passed last September a new set of bail laws that toughened up the law in relation to bail.
"If they had pulled their finger out, to be frank, and got those bail laws operational quickly, this man would have not been on the streets.”
But Mr Borsak said the fatal incident was an “opening for a discussion” on the National Firearms Agreement, introduced by John Howard following the Port Arthur massacre in 1996.
Dismissing the 18 per cent decline in murders committed by firearms in the following two decades, Mr Borsak said the agreement was “foisted upon the Australian public”.
He also criticised Prime Minister Tony Abbott over his incorrect comment that Monis had a gun licence, an incorrect statement provided to his office by the Australian Federal Police.
‘In Mr Abbott’s unseemly haste yesterday he was trying to get his Howard moment’
“We did not need to do what was done [following the Port Arthur massacre],” he said.
“Mr Howard at that time took advantage politically of the situation and we believe in Mr Abbott’s unseemly haste yesterday he was trying to get his Howard moment and that moment has blown up in his face.”
Mr Howard stood by the agreement during an interview with the ABC, stating that it was “an exercise in logic to understand that the more guns there are in the community, the greater the likelihood of mass murder”.
He said any attempt to roll back the laws would be resisted.
“I have been convinced for a long time that what my government did way back in 1996 has made Australia a safer country,” he said.
Senator Leyonhjelm quit the Liberal Party in disgust at the 1996 laws, and has also been a member of the Shooters Party.
Mr Howard said the Liberal Democrat's stance was "a very simplistic and flawed analysis".
"It's very important in the wake of that terrible event for us to keep calm and understand what the right responses are," he said.
"I don't think a right response is to make guns more freely available in the community."
'US-style gun laws in Australia means US-style shootings and death rates'
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten also dismissed the call to loosen laws regulating guns, stating "I don't see how providing more guns into the population make us safer".
Mr Shorten said that compared with gun deaths in America, Australia had proportionally far fewer fatalities.
The acting Greens leader Adam Bandt has also dismissed the push by Senator Leyonhjelm, posting on Twitter that it was incorrect to link looser gun laws to safety.
“US-style gun laws in Australia means US-style shootings and death rates,” he said.
Gun control expert Philip Alpers, from the University of Sydney, said the US was suffering from an epidemic of gun deaths. By contrast, the rate in Australia had halved since laws were toughened.
Current political leaders have also criticised the senator.
NSW Premier Mike Baird had one word for Senator Leyonhjelm: "Wrong".
"That is outrageous," he said.
"I couldn't think of a (more) inappropriate comment than that."
Senator Leyonhjelm has taken to Twitter to defend his comments, calling his critics "hoplophobes" - afraid of guns.
"In which being killed by a lunatic is preferred to having themeans to save your own life," he tweeted.
With AAP.
