I don't know if the Bogey man exists in this little charade or not, it's difficult to come to any sort of solid conclusions.
It does seem to be a consistent story and it does fit with everything else we've been told or not told - if you see what I mean.
Personally, I'm an advocate of not trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. At the moment my perception is that there are very very few prosecutions. If you get a response back from the DoJ saying otherwise then that would certainly sway opinion.
Every single law ever passed has ambiguity in it - Barristers make a healthy living out of exploiting them. Yeah it would be nice if they didn't, but that's not possible. That's why we have Precedence.
My concern is that if a change in law is required it will not be changed in our favour.
If a standard test was introduced, what would you suggest? What safeguards would you build into it to stop it being exploited? Is a standard test enough? Would it require an amendment to the Firearms Act for example to define 'Capable' and use Joules instead of FPE ?