Australia was widely regarded as a world leader in gun control – the Bondi attack has laid bare a more complicated reality.

On a Sunday afternoon in April 1996, a lone gunman armed with powerful firearms 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 weapons policies in the world, can appear as a distant memory for many citizens.

However, the Bondi Beach attack this past Sunday, which resulted in 15 fatalities, has revived the ghosts of the Port Arthur massacre.

Firearm Possession at a Record High

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 nearly twice the amount from two decades prior.

This means approximately one gun for every seven Australians.

While Queensland has the largest arsenal, followed by NSW and Victoria, it is the island state and the NT that have the highest rate of firearm ownership.

The data also challenges the common view that guns are primarily held by rural residents.

Guns are common in urban centres, with a significant portion located in major cities.

Critically, there are now weapons owned by a smaller group, with the average licence holder possessing several firearms.

What Are Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Weapons legislation in Australia are inconsistent across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules across states and territories.

Typically, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be over 18, deemed a "fit and proper person", pass a safety program, and provide a "valid purpose" for ownership.

The allowable purposes include hunting or culling, target or sport shooting, certain occupational requirements, and for collections.

However, significant loopholes remain. For instance, minors in some states 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 large-scale surrender scheme of over 650,000 firearms.

Certain types of firearms were outlawed, and background checks alongside mandatory cooling-off periods for sales were introduced.

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

Renewed Demands for Regulatory Tightening

In the wake the Bondi shooting, political leaders were forceful about the need to tighten gun laws.

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

Other planned reforms now under consideration include:

• Capping the number of guns an individual can have registered.
• Ending "perpetual" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Enhancing intelligence sharing during licence application processes.

There are also calls for periodic reassessments of existing licence holders, acknowledging that "situations evolve" over time.

A Complicated Debate

These swift actions have sparked debate from some quarters.

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

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

Furthermore, a critical reform from 1996 – a centralised weapon tracking system – remains unfinished, 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 be updated with technological advances.

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

While mass shootings remain infrequent in Australia compared to some nations, the threat persists, and the challenge of firearms circulating illegally – through poor storage – continues to pose a challenge.

As one advocate noted, "It is regrettable that it needs such a loss of life to get people to wake up and take notice."