Australia has long been held up as a global model for gun control following the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, but the Bondi Beach terror attack in December 2025 has reignited debate over whether the country’s firearms laws remain fit for purpose.
The Sydney shooting, which left 16 people dead and more than 40 injured, has prompted renewed political and public scrutiny of loopholes, uneven enforcement and the growing number of firearms in private hands, despite decades of strict regulation.
How the Port Arthur Massacre Reshaped Gun Laws
After 35 people were killed at Port Arthur in 1996, Australia introduced the National Firearms Agreement (NFA), transforming gun ownership from a right into a tightly regulated privilege. The reforms banned automatic and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns and introduced mandatory licensing, registration and a 28-day waiting period for purchases.
According to Al Jazeera, Australia bought back an estimated 659,940 firearms in 2001.
This led to two national frameworks on gun control, namely the National Firearm Trafficking Policy Agreement and the National Handgun Control Agreement, enacted in 2002.
More gun buy-backs were seen as the Australian government collected over 10,000 armaments.
Weak Implementation of 1996 NFA
According to the Australian Institute, 30 years after Port Arthur, ‘there are more guns in Australia than ever before,’ over 4 million registered private firearms, citing that the NFA is ‘falling short of its stated aims.’
In addition, the 2025 study mentioned that there was no National Firearms Register and that even a minor can use firearms in every state.
Even in NSW, minors are allowed to ‘possess and use’ firearms from the age of 12.
Critics say that the National Firearms Register doesn’t allow other states to view the registry from another state – that means, police cannot check the registry, unless verbally, from Victoria to NSW.
One flaw to this design, shared by the study, was: ‘There were renewed calls for a National Firearms Register following a shooting in Wieambilla, Queensland in 2022. Before the shooting, law enforcement in different states allegedly did not share data, allowing one of the perpetrators to purchase ammunition in Queensland despite having a suspended licence in NSW.’
Another flaw found in the policy was the inconsistency between the laws and the types of guns that could be purchased.
In its example, ‘the Wedgetail MPR308 is a pump action rifle banned in NSW, Tasmania and the ACT but can be bought by shooters in all other states and territories.’ NSW has the most registered firearms, with 1,125,553.
Already Tough National Gun Control Laws?
Australian PM Anthony Albanese said that the government is ‘prepared to take whatever action is necessary,’ after the massacre left 16 dead and 40 injured.
***IMPORTANT INFORMATION***
Police can confirm 16 people have died and 40 people remain in hospital following yesterday’s shooting at Bondi.
More information will be made available soon.
— NSW Police Force (@nswpolice) December 14, 2025
‘Included in that is the need for tougher gun laws,’ he told reporters in a press conference.
PM Albanese condemned the attack as an ‘act of pure evil’ and reaffirmed the right for Jews to ‘worship and study and work and live in peace and safety.’
The alleged shooters were father, 50, and son, 24. The police have not released their names.
The father was killed, while the son is hospitalised and in a coma.
On the scene, police found six firearms, noting that the father had a gun license and six licensed firearms.
Two explosives were also found on the site, and bomb units have been deployed for disposal.
Albanese added that the son was investigated by authorities in 2019 for links to the Islamic State; however, no threats or movements happened then.
A Debate Reopened, Not Resolved
Australia’s gun laws remain among the strictest in the world, and mass shootings are still rare by international standards. Yet the Bondi Beach tragedy has reopened an uncomfortable question: whether strong laws are enough without consistent enforcement and modern data-sharing.
As investigations continue, the national conversation has shifted from pride in past reforms to whether a system designed in 1996 can meet the threats of 2025.
Originally published on IBTimes UK
