Australia was long seen as a world leader in firearm regulation – the Bondi attack has exposed a more complicated situation.

On a spring day in the year 1996, a single attacker wielding powerful firearms murdered 35 people in the Australian tourist town of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly thirty years ago, which ushered in some of the most stringent firearm regulations in the world, can seem like a distant memory for many citizens.

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

Firearm Possession at a Record High

A analysis revealed that there are now more than four million weapons owned by civilians across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from the late 1990s.

This means approximately a weapon for each small group of people.

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

The data also contradicts the widespread belief that guns are mainly owned by rural residents.

Guns are prevalent in cities and their outskirts, with a significant portion located in major cities.

Critically, there are now firearms concentrated among fewer owners, with the average licence holder possessing several firearms.

Understanding Australia's Present Firearm Regulations?

Weapons legislation in Australia are varied across the country, with a disparate implementation of rules in various regions.

Broadly speaking, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be of legal age, deemed a "responsible individual", pass a safety program, and provide a "valid purpose" for ownership.

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

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 voluntary hand-in of over 650,000 firearms.

Rapid-fire weapons were banned, and vetting procedures alongside delays for sales were introduced.

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

New Push for Regulatory Tightening

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

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

Other suggested measures now under consideration include:

• Restricting the number of guns an individual can possess.
• Reforming "perpetual" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during vetting processes.

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

An Ongoing Controversy

These reform efforts have drawn criticism from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates argue that limiting gun numbers would not have averted an attack driven by radicalisation.

They suggest that resources would be better spent combating radicalisation rather than tightening regulations for the vast majority of licensed individuals.

Furthermore, a critical reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains unfinished, though it has now been listed as a key project.

A Catalyst for Change

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

They argue that modernisation is needed to "keep up-to-date" and prevent future tragedies.

While mass shootings remain relatively rare in Australia compared to some nations, the potential persists, and the challenge of weapons being misused – through theft – continues to pose a challenge.

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