Australia has long been held up internationally as a model for strict and effective gun control. Since the sweeping reforms that followed the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, firearm ownership has been tightly regulated, and mass shootings have been rare. That is why recent revelations surrounding the Bondi terror attacks have shocked the nation and raised uncomfortable questions about how Australia’s gun laws operate in practice.
As details emerged, Australians learned that a 50-year-old father, Sajid Akram, and his 24-year-old son, Naveed Akram, had access to six firearms in suburban Sydney. Police later confirmed all of the guns were legally owned and properly registered. The father held a recreational hunting licence and was a member of a gun club. To many, this revelation seemed incompatible with Australia’s reputation for tough gun laws.
In response to public concern, National Cabinet has now committed to reviewing and strengthening firearm regulations nationwide. Proposed reforms include renegotiating the National Firearms Agreement, placing caps on the number of firearms an individual can own, and limiting open-ended or long-term licensing. To understand why these changes are being considered, it is essential to examine how gun ownership currently works in Australia – and where the system may have gaps.
How Gun Ownership Works in New South Wales
Although firearm laws differ slightly across states and territories, they are broadly similar. New South Wales offers a useful case study.
The first requirement for gun ownership is obtaining a firearms licence. Applicants undergo background checks to ensure they have no relevant criminal history, including domestic violence offences, serious criminal convictions, or mental health orders. Authorities also assess applicants under the “fit and proper person” test, which evaluates character, judgment, honesty, and respect for the law.
If approved, the licence alone does not allow immediate gun ownership. Each firearm purchase requires a separate “permit to acquire,” linked to a specific weapon. First-time buyers must observe a mandatory 28-day waiting period. Subsequent purchases in the same category do not require an additional wait.
Applicants must also complete a firearms safety course, covering both practical handling and theoretical knowledge, including a written assessment. Once acquired, firearms must be stored securely, unloaded, and locked in approved safes, with ammunition stored separately.
Crucially, Australian law requires a “genuine reason” for owning a firearm. Acceptable reasons include recreational hunting, sport shooting, and primary production. Self-defence or personal protection is explicitly excluded. Gun owners must provide evidence for each firearm they acquire, such as membership in a gun club or written permission from a landowner where hunting will occur.
For recreational shooters, ongoing participation is mandatory. In New South Wales, licence holders must compete in a minimum number of shooting competitions each year to retain their status.
What the System Does Well
Many aspects of Australia’s gun control framework function effectively. The genuine reason requirement, in particular, prevents casual or impulsive gun ownership and discourages isolation. By tying firearm access to organised activities like clubs and competitions, the system ensures gun owners remain embedded in a broader community.
Research involving gun clubs suggests these communities often act as informal safety nets. Members tend to notice changes in behaviour, attitudes, or beliefs among fellow shooters. In serious cases, club members may report concerns to police, prompting further investigation. Contrary to stereotypes, many firearm owners strongly support strict regulation and share a commitment to public safety.
This raises difficult questions in the Bondi case. How actively engaged was the shooter with the gun-owning community? Were there warning signs that went unnoticed or unreported? These questions remain unanswered.
Why Reform Is Being Considered
While investigations are ongoing, it is known that one of the men involved was known to ASIO, Australia’s domestic intelligence agency. All firearms were registered to the father, who reportedly had no prior incidents associated with his licence.
National Cabinet has agreed on several reform measures. These include accelerating the development of a national firearms register, restricting gun licences to Australian citizens, and introducing caps on the number of firearms a person can own. Western Australia has already implemented such limits, allowing recreational shooters up to five firearms, and primary producers or competitive shooters up to ten.
Supporters argue that caps could reduce risk by limiting access, particularly in cases of misuse. However, critics point out that licensed firearm owners in New South Wales already own an average of about four guns. Moreover, existing laws already require a separate genuine reason for each additional firearm. People cannot legally accumulate guns without justification.
Whether a numerical cap would have prevented the Bondi attack remains unclear. Without knowing how many firearms were used, or in what way, it is difficult to assess the practical impact of such a reform.
Reviewing Licences More Often
Another proposal involves limiting open-ended licensing and potentially increasing the frequency of licence reviews. Currently, most New South Wales firearm licences are valid for two to five years. More frequent renewals could, in theory, help authorities identify emerging risks.
However, licensing reviews are inherently backward-looking. They can only capture incidents already known to authorities. If an individual has not committed an offence or attracted official attention, concerning changes in behaviour may go undetected.
Indeed, police have stated that the Bondi shooter’s firearms licence had no recorded incidents. More frequent reviews might have uncovered new information – or they might not have. There is no clear evidence either way.
Increasing review frequency would also require significant additional police resources, raising questions about feasibility and effectiveness.
Beyond the Letter of the Law
One promising avenue for reform lies in better use of existing touchpoints within the system. Firearms dealers, for example, interact directly with buyers and may notice changes in behaviour, attitudes, or purchasing patterns. Involving dealers more actively in monitoring and reporting could add another layer of prevention.
Ultimately, law reform alone cannot eliminate gun violence. Effective implementation requires adequate resourcing, cooperation with communities, and systems that capture meaningful information – not just paperwork.
Australia’s gun laws remain among the strictest in the world, and they have saved countless lives. But the Bondi attacks have shown that even robust systems must be continually examined and improved. The challenge now is to ensure that any changes made genuinely enhance public safety, rather than offering reassurance without results.
Comments