Australia had long been viewed as a global exemplar in weapons legislation – the Bondi tragedy has exposed a much murkier situation.

On a spring day in the year 1996, a solitary shooter wielding rapid-fire weapons killed 35 people in the historic site of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly thirty years ago, which ushered in some of the toughest gun laws in the world, can seem like a different era for many citizens.

However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which resulted in 15 fatalities, has brought back painful recollections of the Tasmanian tragedy.

Weapons Holdings at a Unprecedented Level

A analysis 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 about 20 years ago.

This equates to approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While the state of Queensland has the largest arsenal, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and the state of Victoria, it is Tasmania and the NT that have the highest rate of firearm ownership.

The data also dispels the popular notion that guns are mostly possessed by those in the countryside.

Weapons are common in urban centres, with a significant portion located in urban hubs.

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

What Are Australia's Current Gun Laws?

Firearm regulations in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a mixed implementation of rules across states and territories.

Typically, to secure a gun licence, an individual must be of legal age, deemed a "responsible individual", pass a training and safety course, and provide a "genuine reason" for ownership.

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

However, significant loopholes remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some states can have access to a firearm from as young as early adolescence.

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

Automatic and semi-automatic rifles were prohibited, and security screenings alongside waiting periods for sales were introduced.

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

Renewed Demands for Gun Law Reform

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

A weapons collection initiative was unveiled, marking the first such effort since 1996.

Other planned reforms now under consideration include:

• Restricting the number of guns an individual can have registered.
• Addressing "indefinite" licensing arrangements.
• Making formal citizenship a prerequisite for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during licence application processes.

There are also calls for regular reviews of existing licence holders, acknowledging that "people's circumstances can change" over time.

A Complicated Debate

These proposed changes have drawn criticism from some quarters.

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

They suggest that political capital would be better spent combating radicalisation rather than changing laws for the vast majority of law-abiding citizens.

Furthermore, a key proposed reform from 1996 – a national firearms register – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a priority.

Tragedy as a Wake-Up Call

For campaigners, the Bondi attack is a tragic indication that regulations must evolve with changing times.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "address deficiencies" and prevent future tragedies.

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

As one advocate noted, "It is unfortunate that it needs such a devastating event to prompt action and pay heed."