The nation of Australia was widely regarded as a global exemplar in gun control – the Bondi attack has exposed a much murkier reality.

On a spring day in 1996, a lone gunman armed with rapid-fire weapons murdered 35 people in the Tasmanian tourist destination of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly three decades ago, which sparked some of the most stringent firearm regulations in the world, can feel like a distant memory for many citizens.

However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which claimed 15 lives, has brought back painful recollections of the Tasmanian tragedy.

Weapons Holdings at a Unprecedented Level

A study released earlier this year revealed that there are now more than four million privately-owned firearms across the country – a figure that is almost double the amount from the late 1990s.

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

While 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 greatest density of weapons.

The data also contradicts the widespread belief that guns are mostly possessed by people in regional areas.

Weapons are common in urban centres, with a large share located in major cities.

Critically, there are now firearms concentrated among fewer owners, with the registered individual possessing more than four firearms.

What Are Australia's Current Gun Laws?

Gun control laws in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules across states and territories.

Broadly speaking, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be over 18, deemed a "responsible individual", pass a competency test, and provide a "legitimate need" for ownership.

The permitted justifications include recreational hunting or pest control, competitive shooting, certain job-related needs, and as a hobby.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, young people in some jurisdictions 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 massive buyback of over 650,000 firearms.

Automatic and semi-automatic rifles were prohibited, and vetting procedures alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

A key tenet of these reforms was the removal of "home security" as a valid reason for gun ownership.

Fresh Calls for Firearm Policy Changes

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

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

Other planned reforms now under consideration include:

• Restricting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Ending "indefinite" licensing arrangements.
• Making formal citizenship a prerequisite for firearm ownership.
• Improving intelligence sharing during licence application processes.

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

An Ongoing Controversy

These proposed changes have drawn criticism from some quarters.

Pro-gun advocates argue that limiting gun numbers would not have stopped an attack driven by extremist ideology.

They suggest that focus would be better spent combating radicalisation rather than restricting lawful owners for the great bulk of licensed individuals.

Furthermore, a long-promised reform from 1996 – a country-wide gun database – remains not yet operational, though it has now been listed as a key project.

A Catalyst for Change

For reformers, the Bondi attack is a tragic indication that gun laws must be updated with new threats.

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

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

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