Reply #13: I did read it, it was poorly written.

[sergeiAK]

.32 caliber cartridge can mean waaaaay too much (and way too little), so the act should have specified exact calibers, such as .32 ACP, 7.65 Browning, .32 H&R, .32 S&W Long/Short, etc. Not all of these are true .32 calibers, and the law should either have specified a bore diameter in some known (and defined) unit of measure, or actual ammunition that it could accept. IE if it banned .32ACP and 7.65 Browning firearms, this case would have been open and shut.

Under this law, would a C96 be illegal? It uses the 7.65x25mm cartridge, which is also designated .30 Mauser. Would it be considered 30 or 32 caliber?

On the topic of why it was banned, this sentence caused some confusion:
"Hromatka asserts the 7.65 millimetre handgun is not a .32 calibre prohibited pistol, but a .30 calibre restricted pistol, which after modifications he can legally possess."

So he can (post modification) possess such a gun in 30 caliber, but not 32 caliber? Nothing I read in the links you provided said otherwise (assuming a correct barrel length), though I'm certainly no lawyer.