Australia had long been viewed as a global exemplar in gun control – the Bondi tragedy has exposed a far more complex truth.

On a Sunday afternoon in the year 1996, a single attacker wielding rapid-fire weapons murdered 35 people in the historic site of Port Arthur.

That national tragedy nearly three decades ago, which led to some of the toughest firearm regulations in the world, can appear as a distant memory for many residents.

However, the tragedy in Bondi this past Sunday, which resulted in 15 fatalities, has revived the ghosts of the Port Arthur massacre.

Firearm Possession at a Historic Peak

A recent report revealed that there are now over four million privately-owned firearms across the country – a figure that is almost double the amount from about 20 years ago.

This equates to approximately a weapon for each small group of people.

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 widespread in urban centres, with a significant portion located in major cities.

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

Examining Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Firearm regulations in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a disparate implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.

Broadly speaking, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be an adult, deemed a "fit and proper person", pass a safety program, and provide a "genuine reason" for ownership.

The allowable purposes include hunting or culling, competitive shooting, certain professional duties, and as a hobby.

However, significant gaps remain. For instance, minors in some jurisdictions can have use of a firearm from as young as early adolescence.

Following the Port Arthur massacre, a major rewrite of national gun laws was enacted, leading to a large-scale surrender scheme of over 650,000 firearms.

Certain types of firearms were outlawed, and security screenings alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

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

Fresh Calls for Regulatory Tightening

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

A national gun buyback scheme was announced, marking the most significant such effort since 1996.

Other suggested measures now under consideration include:

• Capping the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Reforming "indefinite" licensing arrangements.
• Making Australian citizenship a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Improving intelligence sharing during vetting processes.

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

A Complicated Debate

These reform efforts have drawn criticism from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates argue that limiting gun numbers would not have stopped an attack driven by extremist ideology.

They suggest that focus would be better spent combating radicalisation rather than tightening regulations for the overwhelming number of responsible owners.

Furthermore, a key proposed reform from 1996 – a country-wide gun database – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a priority.

Tragedy as a Wake-Up Call

For long-time advocates, the Bondi attack is a tragic indication that regulations must keep pace with changing times.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "address deficiencies" and safeguard communities.

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

As one advocate stated, "It is regrettable that it requires such a loss of life to prompt action and take notice."