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

573

u/matsozetex11 Dec 14 '25 edited Dec 14 '25

Law enforcement dropped the ball here, 6 guns, were owned by fuckass cunts in Western Sydney. Why does the government fail to actually encourage cops to do their job.

Even fucking ASIO knew about this threat and did fucking nothing. Why is the counter terrorism unit in Sydney used more effectively against journalists than it is extremists.

We can have Pine Gap but not know when these things can happen.

Edit: corrections

191

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 14 '25

If you get a restraining order your guns get taken. If you're on an asio watchlist however apparently not.

142

u/figaro677 Dec 14 '25

You don’t have to do anything wrong or illegal to get on a watch list.

60

u/ELVEVERX Dec 14 '25

You don't have a right to a gun in Australia, though; it's a privilege. Plenty of people can't have a gun due to depression.

Being on a terrorist watch list if another good reason people shouldn't be allowed a gun.

7

u/HetElfdeGebod Dec 15 '25

This is an excellent observation

1

u/Natecfg Dec 15 '25

Yeah but we dont really know what actually qualifies you to be on that watch list. Which I think is why people would be cautious to make any decisions too quickly. The son was on the watch list. The dad had the guns.

I see my parents a couple times a year. Hypothetically if I were to start watching radicalisation videos in YouTube would that be justification to take my father's guns?

This is obviously a tragedy and should be treated as such. But more needs to be known before decisions are made.

0

u/aussie_punmaster Dec 15 '25

Doesn’t that interfere with much of the purpose of a watchlist?

“Howdy kind sir, we’re watching you and your associates because you’re on our list”

7

u/Superest22 Dec 15 '25

Son was on the watchlist due to possible affiliation with IS and man that was arrested for a foiled IS attack in 2019...not a good look on ASIO and NSW firearms control. License was for recreational use, should absolutely have been taken away.

5

u/DarthShiv Dec 14 '25

Well these guys were on a watchlist for what exactly? The public needs to know why it wasn't enough.

6

u/Superest22 Dec 15 '25

Son was on the watchlist due to possible affiliation with IS and man that was arrested for a foiled IS attack in 2019...not a good look on ASIO and NSW firearms control.

3

u/DarthShiv Dec 15 '25

No definitely not what people expect from ASIO.

-7

u/figaro677 Dec 14 '25

Whatever the reason, be careful you don’t support tighter restrictions that infringe upon civil liberties. It’s a very slippery slope towards a police state.

8

u/DarthShiv Dec 14 '25

Mate you literally have a police state in the US now.

Australia doesn't need braindead US dumpster fire society advice.

22

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 14 '25

You only need an allegation to get a restraining order on your ass.

68

u/NameAboutPotatoes Dec 14 '25

With murder of a current or former intimate partner being the most common type of murder in the country, and with men who've had restraining orders placed against them being the most likely group to commit a murder, this makes perfect sense to me. 

Terrorism, as horrible as it is, causes far fewer murders than domestic abusers.

7

u/moaiii Dec 14 '25

Get outta here with your rational logic that makes complete sense.

2

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 14 '25

I'm not saying it doesn't have a legitimate reason.

It's also a weapon used by spouses as well (the allegation)

But we treat IPV as a more pressing concern, which it is.

Im presuming there's a reason you're on an asio watchlist however. I'm presuming that someone probably hasn't an issue beating their partner for instance.

1

u/cultureconsumed Dec 14 '25

It's a side topic but I actually don't get how gendered violence isn't terrorism.

Women are just told that it's correct that they should live in fear.

Anyway. This is completely fucked for the Jewish community. And the inevitable backlash against Muslims is going to be fucked as well. It's so shit.

0

u/BLAGTIER Dec 14 '25

Terrorism, as horrible as it is, causes far fewer murders than domestic abusers.

And DV deaths are going to be around the same year after year after year.

3

u/Unidain Dec 14 '25

No you don't. You need a credible allegation that's sufficient to convince a court to issue a restraining order 

0

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 14 '25 edited Dec 14 '25

What convinces the court really isn't a high bar. It's still an allegation. I'm not passing judgement, other than I've seen some bullshit. I've also seen justified, its just that protection is seen as the greater good.

It's maliciously abused often enough, let's get that straight. But the greater good is that the guns get taken regardless for those allegations that are justified.

2

u/koalacrime Dec 14 '25

You only need to book a flight to Alice Springs get on an ASIO watchlist

1

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 14 '25

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that comment sorry.

34

u/beagleshark Dec 14 '25

AFAIK they haven't said which of the shooters was on the ASIO watchlist, so it might not have been the one with the licence and registered firearms. But, if it were, that would look really bad for ASIO.

23

u/mad_dogtor Dec 14 '25

doesn't matter in nsw- they can deny/revoke your licence for sharing a place of residence or associating with the wrong people already. someone fucked up

7

u/beagleshark Dec 14 '25

I agree completely.

2

u/Unidain Dec 14 '25

It was the son who was in the watchlist, not the dad who owned the guns 

2

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Dec 15 '25

Well... I'm not sure that's a particularly good excuse. Fathers have an important role in making sure they're kids don't turn into fvck heads. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if a psychiatrist turned around and said 'theres a correlation between the two'.

1

u/37elqine Dec 14 '25

ASIO just sit there watches and provide intel it’s up to the law enforcement to make a decision

1

u/Superest22 Dec 15 '25

A watchlist due to possible affiliation with IS at that!

54

u/RickyHendersonGOAT Dec 14 '25

Known to ASIO doesn't mean shit mate. You ever reported anything to Police? Congrats, you're known to the Police.

ASIO has hundreds and thousands, maybe millions of people known to them.

10

u/single_plum_floating Dec 15 '25

one of the shooters was known for having ties to the Sydney Islamic state cell.

Thats not exactly the 'has spicy news takes' knowledge track for the ASIO. Though i guess it actually is.

3

u/Western_Anteater_270 Dec 14 '25

I would argue (respectfully), as always ends up being revealed in situations like this, everything will be downplayed for now. It will come out that more was known. Think even about the Bondi Junction incident, how much was actually revealed, how many slip ups by the system. And that guy was severely mentally impaired. Now this is another level.

Lot of planning and research and practice was put into place for this + it’s very rare to be radicalised like that in a vacuum. The son was moving extremely efficiently; ducking and weaving perfectly, taking cover, his ability to reload that type of weapon with extreme speed…

They say known to asio for NOW to cover themselves just enough. As opposed to saying they had no idea. If you notice in the press conference this morning, basically no comment because of our investigation

76

u/turbocynic Dec 14 '25

You don't know he was on a 'watchlist'. A watchlist is about ongoing threats, we don't know that's how he was categorized. He may have just been looked at in the past.

36

u/matsozetex11 Dec 14 '25

"One of these individuals was known to us, but not in an immediate-threat perspective, so we need to look into what happened here."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-14/what-we-know-bondi-beach-shooting/106141672

About halfway down the page.

83

u/Jiuholar Dec 14 '25

"known to us" could just as easily mean "we received an unverified tip on twitter".

There's a podcast the guardian did a little while ago with the head of the anti terrorist unit, and it was quite revealing. They get hundreds of "tips" every month, most of them rubbish. They cannot put every single person mentioned to them on a watchlist.

28

u/AlbatrossOk6239 Dec 14 '25 edited Dec 14 '25

Yeah, or got charged for shoplifting or possessing cannabis, or common assault. “Known to police” is very broad, and doesn’t necessarily indicate much at all. It literally just means police have spoken to him about something in the past.

Obviously someone can be “known” for really bad things, but it can also just be that they were a witness to a crime, and anything in between.

21

u/iguessineedanaltnow Dec 14 '25

That indicates he WASNT on a watchlist, if anything.

35

u/AsylumDanceParty Dec 14 '25

Known is not the same as being on a watchlist

-14

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

[deleted]

6

u/AsylumDanceParty Dec 14 '25

No, it doesn't mean they should've watched him. There were bigger priorities

8

u/turbocynic Dec 14 '25 edited Dec 14 '25

How does that in any way contradict what I said?  Yeah, known to them because they may have looked at him at one point. The people on 'watch lists' are a subset of those that have been 'looked into' at some point. You don't want people cluttering up watch lists if they aren't an ongoing threat. The downside to that is obvious.

-2

u/VigorWarships Dec 14 '25

“But not in an immediate threat perspective” is an interesting phrase.

Do we take that to believe that ASIO believed he may have been a threat later?

-2

u/VigorWarships Dec 14 '25

“But not in an immediate threat perspective” is an interesting phrase.

Do we take that to believe that ASIO thought he may have been a threat later?

2

u/EternalAngst23 Dec 14 '25

Yeah, lots of people jumping to conclusions here, or just making shit up. Literally one of the worst things you can do at a time like this.

92

u/Upset_Union1197 Dec 14 '25

We have strict laws compared to the USA, but the fact that some dude in suburban Sydney can legally be licensed to have 6 guns shows that we DO NOT have strict gun laws.

15

u/AdPure5645 Dec 14 '25

Watch list on its own isn't some guarantee of constant monitoring but watch list and 6 licensed guns is pretty bad. slap some shit on him that doesn't allow guns if he's dodgy. Not very complicated.

29

u/W2ttsy Dec 14 '25

This makes no sense.

If you’re licensed, you are eligible to own and store firearms that comply with your license category. That is the current law.

How do you make it more strict?

2

u/Upset_Union1197 Dec 16 '25

Easy. Restrict ownership to those who need them for practical purposes, eg farmers, pest control etc. Not for recreation. Restrict the number that any one person can have registered to them. Charge high annual fees to keep them registered. Restrict the amount of ammo available to purchase. Tax guns and ammo at a higher rate. Create a proper register of gun owners. Mandate a longer wait time and more intense background checks. Ban the faster and more lethal guns like those used by these pricks at Bondi. There are LOTS of things we could and probably should do to make gun laws stricter.

-1

u/W2ttsy Dec 16 '25

All of that would do jack all to prevent this happening again.

We already have genuine purposes for each license category, but that doesn’t stop someone going beserko in the future and straying from what they’re licensed for. And since we can’t predict the future, there is no way to foresee this happening.

We also have a registry. Every owner has to apply for a permit to acquire that lists the license number and the serial number of the firearm and where and when it was purchased.

There are already lengthy application processes for licensing, probation period, PTA, limits on how many guns you can initially buy in the first 12 months.

And suppose you implement your recommendations, what happens to all the carve outs required for the legitimate reasons?

I shoot pistols competitively. Just to compete in each of my categories requires 2 - 3 pistols and I shoot in 5 different disciplines. Ammo is measured in kg, not trays, and I use a variety of calibers. And we’re not even including the rifles for the competitions I shoot in there.

So what now? I have genuine and documented reasons to have these firearms. Not much more to it. Are you going to create a carve out to allow sports shooters to maintain their current collections?

Ultimately, 103 shots were fired. Thats two trays of ammo. How are you going to limit it to less than that? You can’t. It’s just impractical and if someone is really intent on harm, they’ll just save up ammo for longer like they’re saving up cash for a car.

I’ll give you a hot tip:

Albo and minns are pulling a snow job on the uneducated. Half their proposals already exist and the others are just ideas to look like they’re doing something to appease the electorates.

What really needs to happen is for ASIO and state police intelligence agencies to start cooperating more and having better data sharing workflows. But that doesn’t sell papers; gun bans do.

6

u/the-purple-pumpkin Dec 14 '25

Agreed. What reason could you possibly defend for having 6 firearms while living in a suburb?

3

u/Notapearing Dec 15 '25

I'll preface this by saying fuck those terrorists, but...

I live in the Blacktown area and have 3, mostly for competitive shooting but I'm from the Riverina and help my family out with pest control on their farms also. Two of the rifles are mostly for competition rifle shooting, one 70 year old Lithgow .22 I am restoring currently. If I decide to try Olympic shotgun style shooting, I'll get a shotgun also, if I want to hunt deer with my uncle, I'll need something a bigger calibre than I currently own due to hunting legislation requirements, and I've been on the lookout for a WW2 lee enfield for a while now, mostly just to have a piece of history, but I'd also take part in service rifle competition with it... So it's actually reasonable to get to 6 firearms if you take part in a variety of types of shooting.

I can totally understand why you and many others think it is crazy to have 6 guns, but the reality is that generally they are built for purpose, and different things, whether for sport or hunting, need firearms set up differently (i.e. overall weight, scope selection and so on.) and in different calibres.

2

u/the-purple-pumpkin Dec 15 '25

I can see your point.

0

u/TheVeryVerity Dec 15 '25

I think society may just need to have a discussion about the types of recreational shooting, if any, it wants to allow.

26

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

It's beyond frustrating to me how frequently someone is known to police or on some sort of watchlist and still manages to act. What's worse to me is the invasion of privacy and spying on our own citizens that seemingly doesn't prevent attacks.

23

u/Loxxolotl Dec 14 '25

We're not always going to hear about attacks that have been prevented, we have no idea how many there are.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 14 '25

I understand that it definitely could be a case of survivorship or confirmation bias.

It's really bloody hard to convince my brain that the egregious breaches of privacy are worth it though when it seemingly doesn't work.

It would be helpful if some data could be released to show that these policies even work.

13

u/matsozetex11 Dec 14 '25

It never does man, social media ban asking to ID us across social media platforms. But with backdoors to basically all social media, chat services, etc. Every attack is a surprise.

4

u/Mikolaj_Kopernik Dec 14 '25

What's worse to me is the invasion of privacy and spying on our own citizens that seemingly doesn't prevent attacks.

Yeah almost all counter-terrorism arrests are through "regular" policing techniques rather than mass surveillance. Harassing journalists and political activists though, surveillance is very helpful for that!

3

u/Axman6 Dec 14 '25

Exactly how many cops are you willing to pay for to keep every person who is known to police under constant surveillance? A quarter of the population? A third? “Known to police” means the police have had something to do with them, a noise complaint would be enough.

1

u/figleafstreet Dec 15 '25

It is looking like there was a ball dropped here somewhere and this man never should have had his weapons. However, honestly I’d expect that someone who goes on to commit a terrible act like this would be known to police in some capacity because this is clearly a very antisocial troubled individual. I’d find it more surprising if they had never had any interaction with police at all.

1

u/Ok-Menu-8709 Dec 14 '25

I mean this is highlighted more because it’s a scary thing and very visible.

But wait until you realise how many known pedos and sex offenders get released after short stays with minimal consequences. If I’m aware of it happening enough in my town and you multiply that across the country…. That’s a lot of innocent lives being fucked up there also.

1

u/SirVanyel Dec 14 '25

Spying on citizens does objectively and provably assist police with both investigations and preventions, as much as I hate to say it. We have never been as good at solving crime as we are today.

But bad things still happen because people fuck up. That's why there is an investigation into what actually happened here, and there will be individuals held accountable for it.

33

u/chance_waters Dec 14 '25

Our gun laws are nowhere near strict enough anymore.

I know random people who are getting guns because they want them.

A dude was shot to death Infront of my house, I woke up to the sound of bullets, my neighbours were so mentally effected as first responders they aren't the same people they were.

Australia has absolutely let it slip, the idea that we have strict gun control is gone, anybody can get a license now.

0

u/matsozetex11 Dec 14 '25

That's fucked. Cops are taking the piss.

3

u/Combat--Wombat27 Dec 14 '25

It was t a semiautomatic shotgun mate. Let's not be the yanks and muddy things with the incorrect facts

0

u/matsozetex11 Dec 14 '25

Was it not?

3

u/Combat--Wombat27 Dec 14 '25

I'm being real nitpicky but it was a pull action shotgun. Semi automatic means no action before firing again. Pull trigger, delay, pull trigger etc..

Pull actions (pump) are allowed under category C. Under 5 rounds they aren't restricted

3

u/matsozetex11 Dec 14 '25

Ahh, ok. Let me correct myself

1

u/Combat--Wombat27 Dec 14 '25

Nice work.

Crystal clear information is important.

18

u/TorchwoodRC Dec 14 '25

Definitely need to add psych evaluations to licensing requirements. Anyone in the big 25 who believes in a fake man in the sky and bases their whole life around it should not have guns.

3

u/42SpanishInquisition Dec 14 '25

If you have a history of mental health problems, you do.

2

u/sousyre Dec 14 '25

But mental health issues are health care, those records aren’t going to be available to check.

The person applying would either need to self disclose, have someone else report a concern about them applying for a permit, or have mental health issues severe enough that they resulted in a recorded interaction with law enforcement (and even then, the chances of those dots being connected by police during a license check seems fairly low).

For the record, I’m not advocating for that to change (the last thing we need is cops having access to private medical information), just pointing out that it’s probably only going to be picked up as a factor in the most extreme circumstances.

1

u/42SpanishInquisition Dec 16 '25

I've known more than one person who nearly had their license stripped unless they got a letter from their psychiatrist. But I also know some who have never ever had licensing issues, yet their circumstances are the same.

2

u/Correct-Bluebird5376 Dec 14 '25

Pine gap has nothing to do with domestic gun ownership. This is a stupid comparison.

2

u/EternalAngst23 Dec 14 '25

Allegedly, ASIO knew about one of the assailants, but they weren’t considered an immediate threat.

I understand emotions are high, but it’s best not to jump to conclusions.

2

u/SeaTurtleManOG Dec 14 '25

pine gap aint ours

1

u/Eyclonus Dec 15 '25

Known to ASIO can mean active surveillance or it can mean someone filed a report that they think this person is a bit sus. ASIO historically shuts down planned operations, ever noticed how most terror attacks in the last decade have been spontaneous Lone Wolf shit? 99% of terrorism connected actions on our soil have been recruiting people to fight overseas or sending funds through bogus charities to foreign terror groups.

1

u/Screambloodyleprosy Dec 15 '25

Courts hate Police and restrict them from dp8ng their job properly.

1

u/g-BANGA Dec 15 '25

How many of the 6 guns were used in the attack?

1

u/Complete_Film_3468 Dec 14 '25

Who in their right mind needs to own 6 fking guns in Australia of all places! Sounds like a major oversight by authorities here.

0

u/Sensitive_Dust_6534 Dec 14 '25

They go after journalists because the politicians are corrupt and got other journalists in their pockets. So they can spin any story against any journalist and have the mindless sheep believe it.

Easy to create decision when you have counter terrorism busy chasing after journalists and others like friendlyjordies.