Australia was long seen as a global exemplar in firearm regulation – Bondi has laid bare a more complicated truth.

On a Sunday afternoon in the year 1996, a lone gunman wielding rapid-fire weapons took the lives of 35 people in the historic site of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly thirty years ago, which ushered in some of the strictest gun laws in the world, can appear as a bygone age for many Australians.

However, the Bondi Beach attack this past Sunday, which left 15 dead, has rekindled memories of the Tasmanian tragedy.

Weapons Holdings at a Record High

A study released earlier this year revealed that there are now in excess of four million weapons owned by civilians across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from the late 1990s.

This equates to approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While the state of Queensland has the largest arsenal, followed by NSW and the state of Victoria, it is Tasmania and the NT that have the greatest density of weapons.

The data also contradicts the common view that guns are primarily held by those in the countryside.

Guns are common in cities and their outskirts, with a large share located in major cities.

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

What Are Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Firearm regulations in Australia are inconsistent across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.

Generally, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be of legal age, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a safety program, and provide a "genuine reason" for ownership.

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

However, significant loopholes remain. For instance, young people in some jurisdictions can have access to a firearm from as young as 10 or 12 years old.

Following the Port Arthur massacre, a sweeping overhaul of national gun laws was enacted, leading to a massive buyback of over 650,000 firearms.

Rapid-fire weapons were banned, and security screenings alongside waiting periods for sales were introduced.

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

Renewed Demands for Firearm Policy Changes

In the wake the Bondi shooting, political leaders were unequivocal about the need to bolster gun laws.

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

Other suggested measures now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Reforming "indefinite" licensing arrangements.
• Making formal citizenship a prerequisite for firearm ownership.
• Improving intelligence sharing during licence application processes.

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

A Complicated Debate

These reform efforts have sparked debate from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates argue that imposing caps would not have prevented an attack driven by radicalisation.

They suggest that resources would be better spent combating radicalisation rather than restricting lawful owners for the overwhelming number of law-abiding citizens.

Furthermore, a long-promised reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains unfinished, though it has now been listed as a key project.

A Painful Reminder

For long-time advocates, the Bondi attack is a horrific reminder that gun laws must be updated with changing times.

They argue that strengthening is needed to "address deficiencies" and protect public safety.

While mass shootings remain uncommon in Australia compared to some nations, the threat persists, and the challenge of weapons being misused – through poor storage – continues to pose a danger.

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