The nation of Australia was long seen as a global exemplar in gun control – Bondi has exposed a far more complex situation.

On a Sunday afternoon in 1996, a single attacker using powerful firearms killed 35 people in the Tasmanian tourist destination of Port Arthur.

That national tragedy nearly thirty years ago, which ushered in some of the toughest weapons policies in the world, can appear as a bygone age for many residents.

However, the tragedy in Bondi this past Sunday, which left 15 dead, has brought back painful recollections of the 1996 shootings.

Firearm Possession at a Historic Peak

A recent report revealed that there are now more than four million privately-owned firearms 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 Tasmania and the Northern Territory that have the highest rate of firearm ownership.

The data also dispels the widespread belief that guns are primarily held by people in regional areas.

Firearms are prevalent in urban centres, with a large share located in urban hubs.

Critically, there are now weapons owned by a smaller group, with the typical gun owner possessing over four firearms.

What Are Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Weapons legislation in Australia are varied across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.

Typically, to obtain a gun licence, an individual must be an adult, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a competency test, and provide a "valid purpose" for ownership.

The accepted reasons include hunting or culling, competitive shooting, certain professional duties, and collecting.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some areas can have access to a firearm from as young as pre-teen age.

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

Automatic and semi-automatic rifles were banned, and background checks alongside delays for sales were introduced.

A key tenet of these reforms was the rejection of "home security" as a justifiable cause for gun ownership.

New Push for Firearm Policy Changes

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

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

Other proposals now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can possess.
• Reforming "open-ended" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a condition for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during vetting processes.

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

A Nuanced Discussion

These swift actions have sparked debate from some quarters.

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

They suggest that resources would be better spent improving intelligence rather than restricting lawful owners for the vast majority of responsible owners.

Furthermore, a key proposed reform from 1996 – a country-wide gun database – remains unfinished, though it has now been listed as a priority.

A Painful Reminder

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

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

While mass shootings remain uncommon in Australia compared to some nations, the risk persists, and the legacy of firearms circulating illegally – through black markets – continues to pose a challenge.

As one advocate stated, "It's sad that it requires such a tragedy to focus attention and listen."