From Port Arthur to Bondi, Australia’s Gun Laws Need Renewal

…Unsplash

The Port Arthur massacre in 1996 produced one of the clearest examples in Australian public policy of swift, coordinated national law reform.[1] After 35 people were killed, the National Firearms Agreement banned automatic and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, imposed tighter licensing rules, waiting periods, storage requirements and sales controls, and introduced a compulsory buyback.[2] In the years that followed, the national firearms stockpile fell by about one-third.[3] Public mass shootings ceased for a substantial period, and one evaluation found that the reforms were averting at least 200 deaths each year while saving about $500 million annually.[4]

That record matters because the Bondi Beach shooting did not expose failure in the original model. It exposed the erosion of it.[5] The Bondi attack involved legally registered firearms.[6] Police found six guns at the scene, including at least a shotgun and two precision rifles.[7] One alleged gunman held a recreational licence and had six guns licensed in his name.[8] In New South Wales, no cap existed for that class of licence.[9] The attack, therefore, suggests that the central weakness in current law lies less in the absence of regulation than in the expansion of lawful access through regulatory gaps that have widened over time.[10]

What worked after Port Arthur was national coordination, political speed, and a regulatory structure built around prevention rather than reaction.[11] The National Firearms Agreement treated firearm ownership as conditional on public safety.[12] It required a genuine reason for ownership, excluded personal protection as such a reason, imposed waiting periods, and tied access to licensing and storage controls.[13] It is gun availability, not severe mental illness, that drives most gun homicides.[14] Over 95 per cent of gun homicides are committed by people without mental illness, and in Australia and New Zealand, many mass shooting victims were killed by people with no known history of mental illness or violent crime, including many who had lawfully possessed firearms.[15] This evidence rejects any response that treats mental illness as the main explanation.[16]

Bondi therefore points to three reform priorities. First, the number of firearms per licence holder requires firm statutory limits.[17] One recent report found that there were 25 per cent more guns in Australia in 2025 than at the time of Port Arthur, even though the proportion of licence holders had fallen.[18] That shows that more guns are concentrated in fewer hands.[19] The same report states that 41 per cent of New South Wales licensees live in major cities rather than rural or regional areas, and that three in four Australians support limits on the number of guns one person possesses.[20] A legal regime that leaves accumulation untouched creates avoidable risks.[21]

Second, licensing requires continuous review rather than long gaps between checks.[22] The current structure already uses background checks, the fit and proper person test, permit-acquiring rules, safety training, and safe storage requirements.[23] Those features remain valuable.[24] The genuine reason requirement is especially important because it links ownership to an identifiable lawful purpose and to community oversight through clubs and associations.[25] Yet later purchases in the same category do not trigger a new waiting period, and licensing reviews in New South Wales have traditionally stretched between two and five years.[26] Post Bondi reforms moved toward two-yearly reviews, citizenship-based licence restrictions, and tighter limits for recreational licence holders.[27] Those steps move in the right direction, though their design still requires scrutiny.[28]

Third, Australia needs national systems that match modern patterns of risk.[29] The National Cabinet committed to renegotiating the National Firearms Agreement, accelerating the national firearms register, capping the number of firearms a person may own, and tightening licence settings.[30] Parliament later passed reforms that included a national gun buyback scheme, stricter import controls, new checks on firearm licence applications, and stronger information sharing between intelligence agencies and licensing authorities.[31] Those measures matter because lawful ownership no longer, by itself, shows low risk.[32] One source states that Australia now has more firearms than it did before the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.[33] Another reports that the Bondi gunmen would not lawfully have had access to firearms if the new federal law had already been in force.[34] Reform, therefore, requires integration across jurisdictions, agencies, and databases rather than fragmented state responses.[35]

Yet better gun laws are only part of the answer.[36] There is an argument for multidisciplinary prevention linked to domestic violence, suicide risk, alcohol misuse, threatening conduct, and periods of acute vulnerability.[37] It supports lower thresholds for temporary surrender and permanent removal, where necessary, of firearms and gun licences when warning signs emerge.[38] It also states that responsible media reporting should apply to mass violence and cautions against forms of publicity that prime potential perpetrators through attention, instruction, or incentive.[39] Another argument is that longer-term prevention also depends on recognising patterns of grievance, humiliation, social isolation, and violent fantasy before they harden into action.[40] Gun reform works best where restrictions on access operate alongside early intervention and targeted risk management.[41]

The strongest lesson from comparing Port Arthur and Bondi is simple. Australia has already shown that decisive reform reduces firearm deaths.[42] The present task is not to invent a new principle. It is to restore the original one.[43] Public safety requires fewer opportunities for firearm accumulation, tighter and more frequent licensing review, stronger national data sharing, renewed buybacks, tighter import controls, and a legal culture that treats firearm ownership as a regulated privilege rather than a fixed entitlement.[44] Port Arthur showed what worked.[45] Bondi showed what was allowed to weaken.[46]

──────────────────────────────────────────

References

[1] National Museum of Australia, ‘Port Arthur Massacre’ (Defining Moments) https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/port-arthur-massacre.

[2] Michael J Dudley et al, ‘The Port Arthur Massacre and the National Firearms Agreement: 20 Years on, What Are the Lessons?’ (2016) 204(10) Medical Journal of Australia https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2016/204/10/port-arthur-massacre-and-national-firearms-agreement-20-years-what-are-lessons; John Howard, ‘Press Conference, Parliament House, Canberra’ (Transcript, 10 May 1996) https://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/release/transcript-9996.

[3] Dudley et al (n 2).

[4] Ibid; Simon Chapman et al, ‘Australia’s 1996 Gun Law Reforms: Faster Falls in Firearm Deaths, Firearm Suicides, and a Decade without Mass Shootings’ (2006) 12(6) Injury Prevention https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/12/6/365.

[5] Alannah & Madeline Foundation, ‘Bondi Terror Attack: What Went Wrong with Australia’s Gun Laws?’ (News, 18 December 2025) https://www.alannahandmadeline.org.au/news/bondi-terror-attack-what-went-wrong-with-australias-gun-laws; Dudley et al (n 2).

[6] Suzanna Fay, ‘Why Can Someone in Suburban Sydney Own 6 Guns Legally? New Laws Might Change That’ (The Conversation, 15 December 2025) https://theconversation.com/why-can-someone-in-suburban-sydney-own-6-guns-legally-new-laws-might-change-that-272067.

[7] Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[8] Ibid; Fay (n 6).

[9] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ‘The Bondi Shooter Only Had a Basic Gun Licence. How Australia’s Laws Allowed Him to Own So Many Guns’ (ABC News, 15 December 2025) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-16/bondi-shooter-legally-had-many-guns-australian-laws-explained/106145624; Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[10] Dudley et al (n 2); Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[11] Dudley et al (n 2); Howard (n 2).

[12] Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee, Parliament of Australia, The Ability of Australian Law Enforcement Authorities to Eliminate Gun-Related Violence in the Community (Report, 9 April 2015) https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/Illicit_firearms/Report.

[13] Howard (n 2); Murray Davies and Jenny Mouzos, Firearms Legislative Review (Report, Australian Institute of Criminology, 2007) https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-05/firearms-legislative-review.pdf, 16–19; Fay (n 6).

[14] Dudley et al (n 2).

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Fay (n 6).

[18] Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Dudley et al (n 2); Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5); Fay (n 6).

[22] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ‘National Cabinet Agrees Unanimously to Strengthen Australia’s Strict Gun Laws in Wake of Bondi Terror Attack’ (ABC News, 15 December 2025) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-15/albanese-proposes-tougher-gun-laws-after-bondi-attack/106143310.

[23] Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) ss 11, 19, 21, 29, 31, 39–40 (‘Firearms Act’); Fay (n 6).

[24] Ibid s 3(1)–(2); Fay (n 6).

[25] Firearms Act (n 29) ss 8, 12, 16, 18; Fay (n 6).

[26] Firearms Act (n 29) ss 21, 31(3); Fay (n 6).

[27] NSW Government, ‘NSW Government to Introduce Toughest Gun Law Reforms in a Generation’ (Media Release, 19 December 2025) https://dcj.nsw.gov.au/news-and-media/media-releases/2025/nsw-government-to-introduce-toughest-gun-law-reforms-in-a-genera.html; NSW Government, ‘Tighter Gun Laws, Reforms to Bolster Community Safety Pass NSW Parliament’ (Media Release, 24 December 2025) https://www.nsw.gov.au/ministerial-releases/tighter-gun-laws-reforms-to-bolster-community-safety-pass-nsw-parliament; Australian Broadcasting Corporation (n 28).

[28] Fay (n 6).

[29] Fay (n 6); Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[30] Fay (n 6); Australian Broadcasting Corporation (n 28).

[31] Helen Livingstone and Simon Fraser, ‘Australia Parliament Passes Gun Reform and Anti-Hate Bills after Bondi Shooting’ (BBC News, 21 January 2026) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20ge5qwdl2o; Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 20 January 2026 https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber%2Fhansards%2F29342%2F&sid=0035.

[32] Dudley et al (n 2); Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[33] BBC News (n 37); Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[34] BBC News (n 37).

[35] Fay (n 6); Parliament of Australia (n 37).

[36] Dudley et al (n 2).

[37] Ibid.

[38] Ibid.

[39] Ibid.

[40] Paul Valent, ‘Making Sense and Learning Lessons from the Port Arthur Killings’ (1997) 5(5) Australasian Psychiatry 233 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epdf/10.3109/10398569709082279, 235–6.

[41] Dudley et al (n 2); Valent (n 46) 235–6.

[42] Chapman et al (n 4); Dudley et al (n 2).

[43] Dudley et al (n 2); Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5).

[44] Dudley et al (n 2); Fay (n 6); Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ‘The PM Has Announced the “Largest” Gun Buyback Since Port Arthur. Here’s What It Means for Owners’ (ABC News, 18 December 2025) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-19/australia-gun-buyback-2025-explained/106162936; Parliament of Australia, Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill 2026 (Cth) https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7421.

[45] Dudley et al (n 2).

[46] Alannah & Madeline Foundation (n 5); Australian Broadcasting Corporation (n 9).