Australia had long been viewed as a world leader in firearm regulation – the Bondi attack has laid bare a more complicated situation.

On a spring day in April 1996, a single attacker using powerful firearms killed 35 people in the Australian tourist town of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly three decades ago, which led to some of the most stringent gun laws in the world, can appear as a distant memory for many citizens.

However, the Bondi Beach attack this past Sunday, which resulted in 15 fatalities, has revived the ghosts of the 1996 shootings.

Gun Ownership at a Unprecedented Level

A recent report revealed that there are now over four million weapons owned by civilians across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from two decades prior.

This means approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While Queensland has the largest arsenal, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, it is the island state and the NT that have the most guns per person.

The data also dispels the popular notion that guns are mostly possessed by people in regional areas.

Guns are common in metropolitan and suburban areas, with a sizable percentage located in major cities.

Critically, there are now more guns in fewer hands, with the registered individual possessing over four firearms.

What Are Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Firearm regulations in Australia are varied across the country, with a mixed implementation of rules in various regions.

Broadly speaking, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be over 18, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a safety program, and provide a "legitimate need" for ownership.

The accepted reasons include recreational hunting or pest control, marksmanship, certain occupational requirements, and as a hobby.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some jurisdictions can have use 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.

Automatic and semi-automatic rifles were banned, and vetting procedures alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

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

New Push for Firearm Policy Changes

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

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

Other proposals now under consideration include:

• Restricting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Reforming "open-ended" licensing arrangements.
• Making formal citizenship a condition for firearm ownership.
• Improving intelligence sharing during background check processes.

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

A Complicated Debate

These swift actions have sparked debate from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates contend that restricting ownership would not have prevented an attack driven by extremist ideology.

They suggest that political capital would be better spent improving intelligence rather than changing laws for the great bulk of responsible owners.

Furthermore, a long-promised reform from 1996 – a national firearms register – remains incomplete, though it has now been listed as a urgent task.

A Catalyst for Change

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

They argue that strengthening is needed to "keep up-to-date" and prevent future tragedies.

While mass shootings remain infrequent in Australia compared to some nations, the risk persists, and the ongoing issue of weapons being misused – through theft – continues to pose a challenge.

As one advocate noted, "It's sad that it needs such a devastating event to get people to wake up and listen."