Australia was long seen as a global exemplar in firearm regulation – the Bondi attack has exposed a far more complex truth.

On a spring day in April 1996, a lone gunman using powerful firearms took the lives of 35 people in the historic site of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly three decades ago, which led to some of the most stringent gun laws in the world, can seem like a bygone age for many Australians.

However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which resulted in 15 fatalities, has revived the ghosts of the 1996 shootings.

Firearm Possession at a Historic Peak

A analysis revealed that there are now more than four million privately-owned firearms across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from about 20 years ago.

This equates to approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While Queensland has the most registered guns, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, it is the island state and the NT that have the most guns per person.

The data also contradicts the common view that guns are mostly possessed by rural residents.

Guns are common in metropolitan and suburban areas, with a sizable percentage located in population centres.

Critically, there are now weapons owned by a smaller group, with the average licence holder possessing over four firearms.

What Are Australia's Present Firearm Regulations?

Gun control laws in Australia are inconsistent across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules in various regions.

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

The allowable purposes include recreational hunting or pest control, marksmanship, certain job-related needs, and for collections.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, young people in some areas can have supervision of a firearm from as young as 10 or 12 years old.

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

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

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

Renewed Demands for Firearm Policy Changes

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

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

Other planned reforms now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can have registered.
• Ending "open-ended" licensing arrangements.
• Making formal citizenship a condition for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during background check processes.

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

A Complicated Debate

These proposed changes 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 focus would be better spent improving intelligence rather than tightening regulations for the vast majority of law-abiding citizens.

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 campaigners, the Bondi attack is a horrific reminder that gun laws must be updated with technological advances.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "keep up-to-date" and safeguard communities.

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

As one advocate noted, "It is unfortunate that it needs such a devastating event to focus attention and listen."