The nation of Australia was long seen as a international standard-bearer in gun control – the Bondi attack has revealed a much murkier situation.

On a Sunday afternoon in April 1996, a lone gunman wielding rapid-fire weapons took the lives of 35 people in the Tasmanian tourist destination of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly three decades ago, which led to some of the strictest gun laws in the world, can appear as a bygone age for many citizens.

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

Firearm Possession at a Unprecedented Level

A recent report 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 the late 1990s.

This means approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While the state of Queensland has the most registered guns, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, it is Tasmania 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.

Firearms are widespread in cities and their outskirts, with a sizable percentage located in major cities.

Critically, there are now firearms concentrated among fewer owners, with the typical gun owner possessing more than four firearms.

Examining Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

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

Typically, 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 allowable purposes include sport shooting or animal management, marksmanship, certain professional duties, and for collections.

However, significant loopholes remain. For instance, young people in some states 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.

Rapid-fire weapons were prohibited, and background checks alongside waiting periods for sales were introduced.

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

New Push for Regulatory Tightening

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

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

Other proposals now under consideration include:

• Restricting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Ending "indefinite" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during background check processes.

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

A Nuanced Discussion

These proposed changes have drawn criticism from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates maintain that restricting ownership would not have stopped an attack driven by violent beliefs.

They suggest that focus would be better spent improving intelligence rather than tightening regulations for the great bulk of licensed individuals.

Furthermore, a key proposed reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a urgent task.

A Painful Reminder

For reformers, the Bondi attack is a tragic indication that regulations must keep pace with changing times.

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

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

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