Australia was widely regarded as a world leader in gun control – Bondi has exposed a much murkier situation.

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

That national tragedy nearly a generation ago, which led to some of the most stringent firearm regulations in the world, can appear as a different era for many residents.

However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which left 15 dead, has rekindled memories of the Port Arthur massacre.

Gun Ownership at a Historic Peak

A recent report revealed that there are now more than four million weapons owned by civilians 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 most guns per person.

The data also challenges the common view that guns are mostly possessed by those in the countryside.

Weapons are prevalent in metropolitan and suburban areas, with a sizable percentage located in major cities.

Critically, there are now firearms concentrated among fewer owners, with the typical gun owner possessing several firearms.

What Are Australia's Current Gun Laws?

Gun control laws in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a disparate implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.

Typically, to secure a gun licence, an individual must be an adult, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a competency test, and provide a "genuine reason" for ownership.

The permitted justifications include hunting or culling, target or sport shooting, certain job-related needs, and as a hobby.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, minors in some areas can have supervision of 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 voluntary hand-in of over 650,000 firearms.

Rapid-fire weapons were prohibited, and vetting procedures alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

A key tenet of these reforms was the removal of "home security" as a valid reason for gun ownership.

New Push for Regulatory Tightening

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

A weapons collection initiative was proposed, marking the most significant such effort since 1996.

Other planned reforms now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can have registered.
• Addressing "indefinite" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during background check 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 stopped an attack driven by violent beliefs.

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 not yet operational, 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 keep pace with new threats.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "remain effective" and prevent future tragedies.

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

As one advocate stated, "It is regrettable that it requires such a tragedy to get people to wake up and take notice."