voted compared to someone who believes that
the federal government should maintain and strengthen gun control laws and make sure they're the same around Australia
The majority voted against disallowing the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Amendment (Shotguns and Shotgun Magazines) Regulation 2016, which "reimposes an import ban on the Adler seven-shot lever-action shotgun" (read Liberal Democratic Senator David Leyonhjelm full explanation).
Senators voting in favour of this motion support importing this shotgun. Senators voting against the motion, want to keep the import ban.
Senator Leyonhjelm introduced this motion because he believes Australians should be able to import this type of shotgun.
Read more about his reasons - and the reasons why the majority of senators voted against his motion - over on OpenAustralia.
Not passed by a large majority
The majority voted against a motion to further strengthen gun control laws, which means it was unsuccessful.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) a video in circulation violently threatens a high-profile gun control advocate,
(ii) the individuals in the video have previously been referred to the New South Wales Police for posting violent videos aimed at racial and religious minorities and the Greens, and
(iii) former Prime Minister John Howard performed a courageous act in 1996 by pursuing national gun law reform; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to:
(i) maintain and strengthen the National Firearms Agreement,
(ii) commit to a ban on the importation and sale of rapid-fire shot guns, and
(iii) show leadership on firearms similar to that shown by Mr Howard, and work with state governments to have firearms laws amended to provide for the immediate cancellation of a firearms licence and surrender of all weapons when a shooter has displayed threatening, intimidating or offensive behaviour associated with their use of firearms.
Not passed by a modest majority
How "never voted" is worked out
Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple
phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case
was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other
than that they have "never voted" on this policy.