Australia was widely regarded as a global exemplar in firearm regulation – the Bondi attack has revealed a more complicated reality.

On a spring day in April 1996, a solitary shooter wielding semi-automatic rifles murdered 35 people in the Tasmanian tourist destination of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly three decades ago, which sparked some of the most stringent weapons policies in the world, can appear as a different era for many residents.

However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which resulted in 15 fatalities, has brought back painful recollections of the Port Arthur massacre.

Firearm Possession at a Unprecedented Level

A analysis revealed that there are now over four million weapons owned by civilians across the country – a figure that is almost double the amount from about 20 years ago.

This equates to approximately a weapon for each small group of people.

While the state of Queensland has the highest number of legal firearms, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, it is the island state and the NT that have the highest rate of firearm ownership.

The data also challenges the widespread belief that guns are primarily held by people in regional areas.

Weapons are common in metropolitan and suburban areas, with a sizable percentage located in population centres.

Critically, there are now firearms concentrated among fewer owners, with the registered individual possessing more than four firearms.

Understanding Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Gun control laws in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a disparate implementation of rules across states and territories.

Generally, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be over 18, deemed a "fit and proper person", pass a competency test, and provide a "valid purpose" for ownership.

The allowable purposes include recreational hunting or pest control, competitive shooting, certain professional duties, and as a hobby.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some areas can have supervision of a firearm from as young as pre-teen age.

Following the Port Arthur massacre, a comprehensive reform of national gun laws was enacted, leading to a large-scale surrender scheme of over 650,000 firearms.

Certain types of firearms were banned, and background checks alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

A key tenet of these reforms was the elimination of "self-defence" as a valid reason for gun ownership.

Fresh Calls for Firearm Policy Changes

In the immediate aftermath the Bondi shooting, political leaders were forceful about the need to bolster gun laws.

A national gun buyback scheme was unveiled, marking the first such effort since 1996.

Other planned reforms now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can have registered.
• Addressing "open-ended" licensing arrangements.
• Making formal citizenship a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Strengthening intelligence sharing during vetting processes.

There are also calls for regular reviews of existing licence holders, acknowledging that "situations evolve" over time.

An Ongoing Controversy

These swift actions have met with opposition from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates argue that imposing caps would not have stopped an attack driven by extremist ideology.

They suggest that resources would be better spent addressing root causes rather than tightening regulations for the vast majority of responsible owners.

Furthermore, a critical reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains incomplete, though it has now been listed as a urgent task.

A Catalyst for Change

For campaigners, the Bondi attack is a stark warning that regulations must keep pace with new threats.

They argue that strengthening is needed to "keep up-to-date" and safeguard communities.

While mass shootings remain uncommon in Australia compared to some nations, the threat persists, and the ongoing issue of firearms circulating illegally – through theft – continues to pose a problem.

As one advocate reflected, "It's sad that it needs such a devastating event to focus attention and pay heed."