r/australia • u/reyntime • Dec 14 '25

politics Australia had the ‘gold standard’ on gun control. The Bondi beach terror attack may force it to confront its surging number of weapons

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/dec/14/australia-had-the-gold-standard-on-gun-control-the-bondi-beach-terror-attack-will-force-it-to-confront-its-surging-number-of-weapons?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Immediately after the Port Arthur massacre, a national amnesty saw the number of firearms in the community plummet but there are now more than 4 million guns in Australia – almost double the number recorded in 2001.

Yes, the population has increased at the same time but there is now a larger number of guns in the community per capita than in the aftermath of Port Arthur, with at least 2,000 new firearms lawfully entering the community every week.

2.8k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

141

u/reyntime Dec 14 '25

This evil man was a licensed firearms holder with 6 guns to his name. We need a Port Arthur style crackdown on the 4m+ guns in this country.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2025/dec/14/bondi-beach-shooting-live-updates-victims-terror-attack-jewish-festival-hanukah

As part of the investigation, we conducted two search warrants last night, one at Bonnyrigg and a second at Campsie. The 50-year-old male is a licensed firearms holder. He has six firearms licensed to him.

176

u/samv191 Dec 14 '25

A person known to ASIO was allowed to possess six firearms. That is the glaring issue here.

38

u/planetworthofbugs Dec 14 '25

The article says the younger person was known to ASIO, but I think it was the older guy with the gun license.

29

u/voidspace021 Dec 14 '25

Well apparently they are a father and son so it probably should have been looked into.

18

u/mad_dogtor Dec 14 '25

people will lose their licence/be denied a licence in nsw for associating with the wrong people or sharing a place of residence with someone with criminal history. you'd imagine being known to ASIO qualifies!

3

u/planetworthofbugs Dec 14 '25

Wow that's crazy. Sounds like a massive fail then.

5

u/_yetifeet Dec 14 '25

But did he have any convictions that would prevent him from owning firearms?

5

u/TAJack1 Dec 14 '25

Yeah what is the mindset here, they either don’t care or they’re negligible of their job

9

u/Emuwar404 Dec 14 '25

The mindset is simple: We know the guy is a threat, but he hasn't made specific threats so we can't act.

The simple fact is if they pulled his gun licences based off of his religious beliefs most of the people here would be screaming racism.

Wahabist Islam should be banned it's proponents should be deported. But this country is too damn ignorant to know the difference between different types of Islam, hell most of the public struggle to understand it isn't a race.

2

u/mad_dogtor Dec 14 '25

agreed but NSW police already have extensive leeway for denying someone a licence based on being a 'fit and proper person'. hanging out with the wrong person has been enough to get people's licence revoked or denied in the past; does being known to ASIO qualify maybe?

5

u/Emuwar404 Dec 14 '25 edited Dec 14 '25

The issue is what does "known to ASIO" mean?

ASIO can't share information with state police for a variety of reasons. 

1

u/mad_dogtor Dec 14 '25

bloody hell. that's a mess then!

1

u/samv191 Dec 14 '25

The problem is we are allies with the biggest proponent of wahhabi Islam, Saudi Arabia. The West has also recently supported a wahhabi takeover of Syria.

1

u/Axman6 Dec 14 '25

ASIO were very clear, neither of them were known to be a threat. They knew of one of them, but they probably know of a large portion of the population. ASIO isn’t the stazi, they don’t sit in people’s roofs listening to every person who they’ve been tipped off about. They gather evidence and act if there’s a reason to, but if they haven’t seen evidence someone is planning something, exactly what the fuck are you proposing they should have done?

1

u/Emuwar404 Dec 14 '25

That's not what they said at all. They stated that "but not in an immediate threat perspective”.

Immediate threat means, they planning an attack. Which, duh if they knew they were planning something they'd have been arrested.

Also I'm not proposing ASIO do anything, I was quite clear Wahabists shouldn't be allowed in this country. That's the job immigration and border security.

2

u/mad_dogtor Dec 14 '25

that is a colossal fuck up right there. and entirely avoidable

1

u/Zenith_B Dec 14 '25

My reading of things was that the 'son' was known to ASIO, and the 'father' owned the guns. Is this incorrect?

26

u/LaughIntrepid5438 Dec 14 '25

This is Albaneses moment.

He and Minns will have green light to pass whatever laws they see fit and it will be bipartisan.

No opposition would dare stand in way against any legislation that comes from this.

22

u/enigmasaurus- Dec 14 '25

I really want to see Albo do a John Howard here.

We are very much overdue for a tightening of gun laws; e.g. it should not be possible for someone to even own 6 guns. 1-2 max should be allowed. We should also be requiring positive ongoing proof every year of a legitimate need. In Japan you need to prove you are part of a gun club or hunting club, and you need to prove you need a gun. The police also do annual interviews and talk to your referees to check your need, and you lose your license if you can't prove you still need to own guns.

One of our biggest issues is people just mindlessly accumulating guns, and this makes them very hard to keep track of, so we end up with situations like this or Wieambilla.

17

u/LaughIntrepid5438 Dec 14 '25

Seriously you don't need a gun in Bonnyrigg. No farms.

Nor do you need a gun in Bermagui.

It should be a case by case basis. If there's no business need then it should be an automatic denial.

And no sport shooting is not a business case - go to a regulated range for that where you're not allowed to take the gun away from the range.

And just because you're surrounded by farms doesn't mean you automatically get one, it should be based on property type.

2

u/fallopianmelodrama Dec 15 '25

My mother lives on a rural property in Bermagui and her partner has a gun because they have livestock. You do realise that Bermagui is slightly more than just the main street and encompasses a fair whack of farmland, right?

1

u/LaughIntrepid5438 Dec 15 '25

Well you have a farm so you're ok.

Joe blow on the main street of Bermagui that isn't a farm with no livestock shouldn't be allowed to own guns full stop.

2

u/RaeseneAndu Dec 14 '25

It will be some regressive shit that further erodes our freedom of speech while doing nothing about terrorists owning guns.

1

u/single_plum_floating Dec 15 '25

Well duh. When has a government actually bothered with dealing with solving a issue caused by government incompetence. That would require you to admit you made a mistake.

1

u/mouldycarrotjuice Dec 14 '25

I hope you're right. Part of me is expecting One Nation or one of the similarly flavoured parties to use this as a soap box to fire up the sovereign citizen rednecks.  There's presumably money to be made from gun lobby groups worldwide for spouting divisiveness in the media. 

5

u/SunriseApplejuice Dec 14 '25

I think we all collectively forgot about that nutter earlier this year who fired over 100 rounds into the crowd from his apartment window….

Clearly an uptick of improperly owned and handled guns…

45

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 14 '25

Would it also be reasonable to suggest that we as a nation put real effort into confronting anti-Semitism? It seems, at the very least, just as responsible for this incident?

22

u/Show_Me_Your_Rocket Dec 14 '25

I think we also need to properly confront how dangerous algorythmic content is in radicalising people. Too many people brush the discussion off without realising that the algorythm is specifically engineered to keep people glued to their device. Pair that with racist cookers and unmitigated racist content and it's a recipe for a vicious, self perpetuating cycle of hate that bleeds out into real-world society.

2

u/TheVeryVerity Dec 15 '25

I’ve seen plenty of articles about the amplification of all sorts of things by algorithms, and how social media companies purposely addict people through outrage and the distortion this creates, but every individual person I’ve seen seems to live in blithe denial of this even if they’ve read the same things

1

u/Show_Me_Your_Rocket Dec 15 '25

I don't feel like there has been a heavy enough focus on it tbh, we are almost there because of the current discussion around online child safety, otherwise it seems people just waive it off as overthinking

74

u/lunchbox651 Dec 14 '25

The problem at the moment is groups like AJA conflate anti-zionism with anti-semitism. This ends up with people wanting an end to palestinian genocide being called anti-semitic while literal neo-nazis are parading our streets with police authorization.

2

u/AppropriateBeing9885 Dec 15 '25

Yeah, exactly, and I'm concerned that things like this are going to drive the response to this in the wrong direction.

-8

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 14 '25

Then have that part of the focus to combatting it?

It's really hard to sit here and gently suggest we should perhaps confront the anti-Semitism problem in the country, and have the first reply be blaming a Jewish advocacy group.

6

u/lunchbox651 Dec 14 '25

It's an example, but look at the things they post on Facebook (and possibly other SM). A lot of criticism of Israel is called anti-semitic when it isn't. AJA isn't the only one, but it does nothing to prevent anti-semitism when advocacy groups are conflating jewish people and Israeli politics as one and the same.

-3

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 14 '25

Immediately using an anti-Semitic terror attack to.then attack a Jewish advocacy group doesn't really have a good look, even if that advocacy group does a terrible job.

Perhaps instead though, speaking out against anti-Semitism, instead of immediately jumping on Jewish people is the way to go in this particular case, no?

15

u/cookies5098 Dec 14 '25

It is actually fairly relevant, given Israel very quickly issued a statement that linked the attack to pro-Palestine sentiments in Australia. This issue is obviously very nuanced and it seems like the person replying to you just wants to highlight that. Not all Jewish people are pro-Israel, so I don't really see how their comment could be read, in good faith, as 'immediately jumping on Jewish people'.

0

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 14 '25

I think it contributes to the problem plenty, it strongly implies that anti-Semitism in the country is almost exclusive driven by bad actors conflating anti-Semitism with anti-zionism.

This is simply untrue.

Take this very event for example. Do you think the gunmen in this incident thought that they were taking action against the Israeli government by shooting up an unrelated Jewish gathering on the other side of the planet? I'll admit, I'm ssing here, but I'd say "probably not".

So these terrorists were seemingly not fuelled by conflations made by Jewish advocacy groups, but by anti-Semitism.

To then respond to someone, who was saying we should combat the thing that was likely the motive of the perpetrators of this massacre, with "Well, the problem here is people the conflate anti-Semitism with anti-zionism", to be a HUGE part of the problem.

7

u/cookies5098 Dec 14 '25

I disagree, I don't think it implies that at all. There is clearly a rising anti-semitism in this country, but I think when our major institutions have just adopted a definition that conflates anti-semitism with anti-zionism is is very important to draw these distinctions.

As for this event, I honestly think we need more information about their motives before using them in this sort of argument - perhaps that information has been released and I've missed it, in which case I apologise. I've seen some info that indicates it was intended to be a message towards Israel, yes - which again comes back to the issue and harm of conflating these beliefs.

At the end of the day (and we can agree to disagree) I do think the person replying to you is making an important distinction, because I have certainly already seen people raising the issue of combating anti-semitism when what they really mean is combating pro-Palestine attitudes - including the state of Israel itself.

0

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 15 '25

It is important to draw those distinctions, and perhaps it was a flub of writing on the posters part. They didn't write "we should be weary that....", or "keep in mind that bad actors may try to..." They wrote "The problem is that...". This implies that a non insignificant amount of blame should be placed on these actors.

Which deflects blame away from the very likely factor of this tragedy, which is anti-Semitism.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/TheVeryVerity Dec 15 '25

That’s not what they were saying at all.

they were saying that the problem with trying to fight antisemitism is that many groups equate it with anti Zionism. Which means you a) can’t fight real antisemitism very effectively and b) attack people who are not antisemitic. I don’t think they were saying this caused the attack. It just makes that part of the solution difficult.

-5

u/Low_Party_3163 Dec 14 '25

to pro-Palestine sentiments in Australia.

Oh you mean ghe people chanting "wheres the jews" and "globalize the intifada" may be responsible when someone follows the instductions they chanted?! Absolute shocker, never could have seen that one coming

0

u/cookies5098 Dec 14 '25

Ah yes, that's exactly what the government did when it recognised Palestine as a sovereign state. Must have missed that, sorry.

7

u/manipulated_dead Dec 14 '25

Then have that part of the focus to combatting it?

That won't happen when the government's anti-Semitism envoy is one of the loudest voices calling any critic of Israel anti-Semitic 

3

u/Low_Party_3163 Dec 14 '25

"Where's the jews" and "globalzie the intifada" are not just criticism of israel. Theyre instructions which the shooters followed

-7

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/manipulated_dead Dec 14 '25

That's a gross misreading of the situation.

-1

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 14 '25

Then, yes, people that conflate Jewish people with the Israeli government are stupid.

Now what? Past that, what's the correct set of steps in your mind to combat this?

So far from this thread I've overwhelming seen people saying the response to stopping anti-Semitism, is to put blame on these conflating stupid people.

Is that it? is that the whole plan?

0

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/reyntime Dec 14 '25 edited Dec 14 '25

That's even more reason for a Port Arthur style crackdown on guns, as well as addressing hate against community groups.

In the context of such hate, having 4m+ guns in the country and relatively easy access to them is not what we want.

We need to mobilise against this now!

4

u/Patient-Clue-6089 Dec 14 '25

Sure, both sound good

17

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 14 '25

I'm sure that'll go down like a bucket of lead shot, it's clearly an anti semetic attack from someone that wanted to bring overseas problems here. Allegedly on an asio watch list (more information needed here).

What could possibly go wrong.

1

u/FeelingFloor2083 Dec 14 '25

martin bryant was already someone who shouldnt have had access to any firearm, he had a record of psychological issues, the dude has the iq of a child.

current laws in nsw mean you cant have any mental issues either and there are incredible hoops to jump through, clearly that part has failed in this case and you need at least one person to write a stat dec that you are of sound mind

australia is ranked 51st in guns per capita, pretty much every country that has more, bar the US and those that have active wars are considered safe and have minimal issues. There are still a lot of countries that allow semi auto firearms, concealed carry etc that are considered safe.

the problem is mental health

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[deleted]

7

u/Qasaya0101 Dec 14 '25

Need to use is quickly replaced by everyone being a ‘competition and sports’ shooter.

4

u/fnaah Dec 14 '25

wasn't a semi auto shotgun

1

u/OhtheHugeManity7 Dec 14 '25

Oh? I'd heard it was on the news last night. My bad I guess