Australia was long seen as a international standard-bearer in weapons legislation – the Bondi attack has laid bare a more complicated truth.

On a Sunday afternoon in the year 1996, a solitary shooter using semi-automatic rifles murdered 35 people in the Australian tourist town of Port Arthur.

That horrific event nearly a generation ago, which led to some of the strictest gun laws in the world, can feel like a distant memory for many citizens.

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

Weapons Holdings at a Record High

A analysis revealed that there are now in excess of four million privately-owned firearms across the country – a figure that is nearly twice the amount from two decades prior.

This means approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While Queensland has the highest number of legal firearms, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, it is Tasmania and the NT that have the greatest density of weapons.

The data also challenges the common view that guns are mostly possessed by people in regional areas.

Firearms are prevalent in urban centres, with a sizable percentage located in population centres.

Critically, there are now more guns in fewer hands, with the registered individual possessing more than four firearms.

What Are Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Weapons legislation in Australia are not uniform across the country, with a mixed implementation of rules between different jurisdictions.

Broadly speaking, to secure a gun licence, an individual must be an adult, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a training and safety course, and provide a "legitimate need" for ownership.

The permitted justifications include sport shooting or animal management, target or sport shooting, certain job-related needs, and as a hobby.

However, significant loopholes remain. For instance, individuals under 18 in some states can have supervision of a firearm from as young as pre-teen age.

Following the Port Arthur massacre, a sweeping overhaul of national gun laws was enacted, leading to a massive buyback of over 650,000 firearms.

Rapid-fire weapons were outlawed, and security screenings alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

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

Renewed Demands for Firearm Policy Changes

In the wake the Bondi shooting, political leaders were clear about the need to bolster gun laws.

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

Other proposals now under consideration include:

• Capping the number of guns an individual can possess.
• Reforming "open-ended" licensing arrangements.
• Making Australian citizenship a prerequisite for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during background check processes.

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

A Nuanced Discussion

These reform efforts have sparked debate from some quarters.

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

They suggest that political capital would be better spent combating radicalisation rather than changing laws for the overwhelming number 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 priority.

A Painful Reminder

For long-time advocates, the Bondi attack is a tragic indication that regulations must be updated with changing times.

They argue that strengthening is needed to "address deficiencies" and safeguard communities.

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

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