You didn't look at the links I posted then.
You don't get to keep your own guns because you happen to be a police officer. The Police as a government body are entitled to use firearms to enforce the law, and they do so under specific conditions.
The only reason a gun club would not be able to keep guns is because those guns cannot be held there under legal circumstances, so I don't see a problem.
If you look at the figures for police gun incidents, they have been falling since the 1997 amendment. You'd also see that the number of authorised firearms officers has dropped 7%.
That suggests:
1) Authorised Police use of firearms is allowed, since there has not been a 100% drop, and
2) The number of AFOs has fallen more or less in line with the drop in gun incidents that the police are involved in - because the law is working.
I assume you mean "who has to die for that?", which would be a poor approach since under the amended act the vast majority of gun deaths will be due to criminal involvement, rather than accidental or self-inflicted. It's a bit like saying "if we can't get rid of all the gun deaths, then let's bring back the guns and kill some more people", which you're obviously not intending to say
If you mean money-wise, I'd much rather pay the taxable end of an investigation into the odd crime than pay for dozens of special task forces who can't actually do anything effective in the face of unregulated gun ownership.