Australia was widely regarded as a global exemplar in firearm regulation – the Bondi tragedy has revealed a far more complex situation.

On a spring day in 1996, a lone gunman armed with powerful firearms killed 35 people in the Australian tourist town of Port Arthur.

That national tragedy nearly three decades ago, which sparked some of the most stringent weapons policies in the world, can appear as a distant memory for many residents.

However, the tragedy in Bondi this past Sunday, which left 15 dead, has brought back painful recollections of the 1996 shootings.

Gun Ownership at a Historic Peak

A study released earlier this year revealed that there are now over four million weapons owned by civilians across the country – a figure that is roughly two times the amount from two decades prior.

This means approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While Queensland has the highest number of legal firearms, followed by NSW and the state of Victoria, it is the island state and the Northern Territory that have the most guns per person.

The data also contradicts the widespread belief that guns are mainly owned by rural residents.

Guns are widespread in urban centres, with a significant portion located in population centres.

Critically, there are now firearms concentrated among fewer owners, with the average licence holder possessing more than four firearms.

Understanding Australia's Current Gun Laws?

Weapons legislation in Australia are varied across the country, with a disparate implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.

Typically, to secure a gun licence, an individual must be over 18, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a competency test, and provide a "legitimate need" for ownership.

The permitted justifications include recreational hunting or pest control, competitive shooting, certain professional duties, and for collections.

However, significant gaps remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some states can have access to a firearm from as young as pre-teen age.

Following the Port Arthur massacre, a sweeping overhaul of national gun laws was enacted, leading to a voluntary hand-in of over 650,000 firearms.

Automatic and semi-automatic rifles were outlawed, and security screenings alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

A key tenet of these reforms was the removal of "personal protection" as a justifiable cause for gun ownership.

Renewed Demands for Gun Law Reform

In the hours following the Bondi shooting, political leaders were forceful about the need to strengthen gun laws.

A country-wide firearm surrender program was announced, marking the most significant such effort since 1996.

Other suggested measures now under consideration include:

• Restricting the number of guns an individual can possess.
• Ending "perpetual" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a prerequisite for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during licence application processes.

There are also calls for ongoing evaluations of existing licence holders, acknowledging that "individuals can be radicalised" over time.

A Nuanced Discussion

These proposed changes have drawn criticism from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates argue that restricting ownership would not have averted an attack driven by radicalisation.

They suggest that resources would be better spent addressing root causes rather than restricting lawful owners for the great bulk of law-abiding citizens.

Furthermore, a long-promised reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a urgent task.

A Painful Reminder

For reformers, the Bondi attack is a stark warning that regulations must evolve with technological advances.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "remain effective" and safeguard communities.

While mass shootings remain uncommon in Australia compared to some nations, the threat persists, and the ongoing issue of guns in the wrong hands – through poor storage – continues to pose a problem.

As one advocate noted, "It is regrettable that it requires such a devastating event to prompt action and listen."