Australia had long been viewed as a global exemplar in weapons legislation – the Bondi attack has laid bare a more complicated situation.

On a Sunday afternoon in the year 1996, a lone gunman using rapid-fire weapons murdered 35 people in the Tasmanian tourist destination of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly a generation ago, which led to some of the most stringent weapons policies in the world, can appear as a distant memory for many residents.

However, the Bondi Beach attack this past Sunday, which claimed 15 lives, has rekindled memories of the 1996 shootings.

Gun Ownership at a Record High

A study released earlier this year revealed that there are now over four million weapons owned by civilians across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from two decades prior.

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

While the state of Queensland has the largest arsenal, followed by NSW and the state of Victoria, it is the island state and the Northern Territory that have the most guns per person.

The data also dispels the popular notion that guns are mostly possessed by people in regional areas.

Guns are widespread in cities and their outskirts, with a large share located in major cities.

Critically, there are now weapons owned by a smaller group, with the registered individual possessing more than four firearms.

Examining Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

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

Typically, to secure a gun licence, an individual must be over 18, deemed a "responsible individual", pass a training and safety course, and provide a "genuine reason" for ownership.

The allowable purposes include sport shooting or animal management, competitive shooting, certain job-related needs, and for collections.

However, significant gaps remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some jurisdictions can have use of 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 outlawed, and background checks alongside delays for sales were introduced.

A key tenet of these reforms was the elimination of "home security" as a acceptable grounds for gun ownership.

Fresh Calls for Regulatory Tightening

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

A country-wide firearm surrender program was proposed, marking the first such effort since 1996.

Other suggested measures now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Ending "perpetual" licensing arrangements.
• Making Australian citizenship a condition for firearm ownership.
• Strengthening intelligence sharing during background check processes.

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

A Nuanced Discussion

These swift actions have drawn criticism from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates contend that imposing caps would not have averted an attack driven by radicalisation.

They suggest that resources would be better spent addressing root causes rather than changing laws for the great bulk of law-abiding citizens.

Furthermore, a critical reform from 1996 – a national firearms register – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a urgent task.

A Catalyst for Change

For reformers, the Bondi attack is a stark warning that policies must be updated with new threats.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "address deficiencies" and protect public safety.

While mass shootings remain infrequent in Australia compared to some nations, the risk persists, and the ongoing issue of firearms circulating illegally – through black markets – continues to pose a danger.

As one advocate noted, "It's sad that it requires such a loss of life to get people to wake up and pay heed."