Australia had long been viewed as a global exemplar in firearm regulation – the Bondi attack has revealed a more complicated truth.
On a Sunday afternoon in April 1996, a lone gunman using powerful firearms murdered 35 people in the Tasmanian tourist destination of Port Arthur.
That massacre nearly thirty years ago, which led to some of the strictest weapons policies in the world, can feel like a different era for many citizens.
However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which left 15 dead, has revived the ghosts of the Tasmanian tragedy.
Firearm Possession at a Unprecedented Level
A analysis revealed that there are now more than four million guns in private hands across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from about 20 years ago.
This means approximately one firearm per seven citizens.
While Queensland has the most registered guns, followed by NSW and Victoria, it is the island state and the NT that have the greatest density of weapons.
The data also challenges the widespread belief that guns are mostly possessed by those in the countryside.
Firearms are common in cities and their outskirts, with a sizable percentage located in population centres.
Critically, there are now more guns in fewer hands, with the average licence holder possessing several firearms.
What Are Australia's Present Firearm Regulations?
Weapons legislation in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.
Generally, to secure a gun licence, an individual must be an adult, deemed a "fit and proper person", pass a competency test, and provide a "valid purpose" for ownership.
The permitted justifications include sport shooting or animal management, competitive shooting, certain professional duties, and for collections.
However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, young people in some jurisdictions can have supervision of a firearm from as young as 10 or 12 years old.
Following the Port Arthur massacre, a comprehensive reform of national gun laws was enacted, leading to a voluntary hand-in of over 650,000 firearms.
Rapid-fire weapons were banned, and vetting procedures alongside delays for sales were introduced.
A key tenet of these reforms was the rejection of "self-defence" as a acceptable grounds for gun ownership.
Renewed Demands for Regulatory Tightening
In the wake the Bondi shooting, political leaders were forceful about the need to bolster gun laws.
A weapons collection initiative was unveiled, marking the most significant such effort since 1996.
Other planned reforms now under consideration include:
- Limiting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
- Addressing "perpetual" licensing arrangements.
- Making formal citizenship a prerequisite for firearm ownership.
- Enhancing intelligence sharing during vetting processes.
There are also calls for periodic reassessments of existing licence holders, acknowledging that "individuals can be radicalised" over time.
A Nuanced Discussion
These swift actions have met with opposition from some quarters.
Pro-gun advocates contend that restricting ownership would not have averted an attack driven by radicalisation.
They suggest that focus would be better spent improving intelligence rather than changing laws for the great bulk of law-abiding citizens.
Furthermore, a key proposed reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a urgent task.
A Catalyst for Change
For reformers, the Bondi attack is a horrific reminder that gun laws must be updated with technological advances.
They argue that modernisation is needed to "address deficiencies" and prevent future tragedies.
While mass shootings remain relatively rare in Australia compared to some nations, the potential persists, and the ongoing issue of firearms circulating illegally – through black markets – continues to pose a danger.
As one advocate noted, "It is unfortunate that it requires such a tragedy to focus attention and take notice."
