Australia was long seen as a world leader in gun control – the Bondi tragedy has laid bare a much murkier situation.

On a spring day in the year 1996, a solitary shooter wielding rapid-fire weapons murdered 35 people in the Australian tourist town of Port Arthur.

That massacre nearly a generation ago, which ushered in some of the toughest firearm regulations in the world, can feel like a distant memory for many residents.

However, the shooting at Bondi this past Sunday, which left 15 dead, has revived the ghosts of the Tasmanian tragedy.

Gun Ownership at a Record High

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

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

While Queensland has the most registered guns, followed by New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, it is Tasmania and the NT that have the most guns per person.

The data also challenges the widespread belief that guns are mainly owned by those in the countryside.

Guns are prevalent in metropolitan and suburban areas, with a significant portion located in population centres.

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

Understanding Australia's Existing Weapons Policies?

Firearm regulations in Australia are inconsistent across the country, with a patchwork implementation of rules in various regions.

Generally, to apply for a gun licence, an individual must be of legal age, deemed a "suitable candidate", pass a training and safety course, and provide a "valid purpose" for ownership.

The allowable purposes include hunting or culling, marksmanship, certain professional duties, and for collections.

However, significant shortcomings remain. For instance, young people in some states can have supervision 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 large-scale surrender scheme of over 650,000 firearms.

Certain types of firearms were prohibited, and security screenings alongside delays for sales were introduced.

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

Fresh Calls for Firearm Policy Changes

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 first such effort since 1996.

Other suggested measures now under consideration include:

• Limiting the number of guns an individual can legally own.
• Ending "perpetual" licensing arrangements.
• Making permanent residency a requirement for firearm ownership.
• Improving intelligence sharing during licence application processes.

There are also calls for periodic reassessments of existing licence holders, acknowledging that "people's circumstances can change" 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 averted an attack driven by radicalisation.

They suggest that resources would be better spent addressing root causes rather than changing laws for the great bulk of licensed individuals.

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

Tragedy as a Wake-Up Call

For campaigners, the Bondi attack is a horrific reminder that regulations must evolve with changing times.

They argue that modernisation is needed to "keep up-to-date" and protect public safety.

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

As one advocate stated, "It is unfortunate that it takes such a tragedy to prompt action and listen."