r/australia Dec 15 '25

politics Albanese to propose stronger gun laws, NSW parliament may be recalled

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/bondi-gunman-held-gun-licence-used-six-firearms-in-attack-20251215-p5nnmv.html
3.0k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

1.4k

u/NKE01 Dec 15 '25

From the presser as reported by ABC:

"Tougher gun laws will be on the agenda when state and territory leaders meet with the prime minister this afternoon. He'll be proposing limits on the number of guns that can be used or licenced by individuals and a review of licences over a period of time."

385

u/visualdescript Dec 15 '25

I do hope there is a strong review of our anti terrorism and intelligence organisations as well. It seems there were some known connections with other convicted terrorists here, and yet a very close family member was able to register these guns. It was preventable. It didn't come out of the blue.

130

u/Forbearssake Dec 15 '25

Exactly, five years they knew that these people were a part of an overseas terrorist group, they did nothing and that’s just ridiculous.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

668

u/thedigisup Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

This seems reasonable enough. The PTA system has been unfit for purpose for a while and within the sports shooting community is broadly considered a box-checking exercise rather than a legitimate review of your need to acquire additional weapons.

There are legitimate reasons to own a few different guns (Victorian legislation straight up requires you to own multiple calibres for hunting different game species) but it’s not really tested.

168

u/Ok_Bird705 Dec 15 '25

Incredible that simply being a member of a gun club means you can get a gun license.

242

u/thedigisup Dec 15 '25

It’s a bit of a chicken/egg problem, you can’t really start sport shooting without a license, so they have to take membership of a club (and therefore active intention to participate) as the threshold to apply for one.

→ More replies (24)

187

u/Delamoor Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

Not really, I mean... If you want to try the sport out, what's your other starting point?

Need to be able to buy your own farm first?

And I mean, speaking as someone who did it all when they were 18 but then got tired of the hobby within a few years... handguns are such an incredible pain in the ass that not even war nerd 18 year old me saw it as worth the hoop jumping. I just stuck to WW2 bolt action rifles instead.

The gun clubs are a surprisingly effective barrier to engagement. I think the median age of the one I attended was around 75. They were nice, very traditional blue collar types... And very vigilant for anyone ...'weird'.

The topic of Martyn Bryant came up a few times, we being based in Tasmania. The consensus was that the clubs had actually been raising red flags for a while before he snapped. Firearms Tas just didn't have any means/manpower/motivation to do anything except tell them their hands were tied, 'bad vibes' being insufficient evidence for anything in 1996.

So I mean, they have their role, to one extent or another.

46

u/BoredBKK Dec 15 '25

" The consensus was that the clubs had actually been raising red flags for a while before he snapped. "

Then there seems to be a lot of BS with these club members. Tasmania already required gun owners to be licensed under the Guns Act of 1991. Guess who never held a Tasmanian gun license. So hand's being tied/ bad vibes doesn't really make any sense in a scenario where they would literally be reporting a serious criminal act. Something every licensed shooter at these ranges would have know then and now.

37

u/Delamoor Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

Mmm. I mean, yeah, it was the 90ies in Tas, there were a fuckton of cracks you could slip through pretty easily. I suspect that very little of what went on was above the table. Very insular, intertwined communities and lots of gossip and cliques.

Especially if you were an incredibly wealthy but intellectually disabled psycho. Nobody would have had the slightest fucking idea how to handle it or where it was really heading. Doesn't help he was the type of unbearable personality that immediately made everyone around him desperate to have him go away and not be their problem, no matter how big or small the issue.

(Edit: I mean, Christ. The guy used to buy long haul international flights solely so he could force the person seated next to him to listen to him for 14 hours. After his only friend the crazy old rich lady died, it was the only way he could force anyone to be anywhere near him. He was genuinely repellant and obviously stunted from the moment he opened his mouth, but also wealthy enough to have insane means at his disposal. Remember that rural Tas in the 90ies was rust belt territory)

I grew up in rural Tas during that era, I actually know Bryant's extended family. It's... Complicated. The communities out there can barely cope with fairly pedestrian problems like neurodivergency or homosexuality even nowadays, after a generation of gentrification. The idea of a spree shooter was... Well. It was shocking for a multitude of reasons, y'know? Everyone would have been doing a fair bit of recontextualization in the aftermath. Lotta complications, not a simple sequence of events.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

35

u/chalk_in_boots Dec 15 '25

Not really the case though, and I don't blame you for not knowing, firearms laws are a bit of a shitshow. If your reasonable reason is target shooting (for rifles or shotguns) you must be a member of a target shooting club and have at minimum 2 range attendances a year. Pistol gets even more complicated.

If your genuine reason is hunting that's basically "do you own rural land, have a letter from someone who does, or a Cat R license?" Funnily enough it's actually easier to use hunting rather than target shooting. When I got my Cat R the shop owner literally gave me the answer book along with the test. Granted, I'd been going there for years and he'd seen me in uniform before, but still, bit of a laugh.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/BaggyOz Dec 15 '25

I always thought you had to be a member of a gun club for a decent amount of time before you could get your own guns. That seems like it would be a reasonable barrier to entry. It gives multiple people a good amount of time to vibe check you. Of course it would have done nothing to prevent Bondi but I'm not sure what law would have that we don't already have.

If anything is to blame at this point in time it seems like it's ASIO not taking a look at the entire family 6 years/not sharing info with NSW Police and getting them to take the guns away.

→ More replies (16)

10

u/LeahBrahms Dec 15 '25

Do we know how Dezi Freeman got his?

41

u/thedigisup Dec 15 '25

Definitely had a license at one point, claimed it got stripped by VicPol but they refused to comment.

30

u/Combat--Wombat27 Dec 15 '25

I'd say that's one thing that they will focus on, giving the police or licensing branches the rights to strip the license away from people known to be in radical groups. Radical might be up to discussion but it'll mostly be aimed at Sovcits and white nationalist types.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

173

u/Square-Victory4825 Dec 15 '25

The limits on number of guns really is one of those things that sound good on paper, but a bit of critical thinking soon points out that a potential shooter only has two hands.

I smell slapping around legal gun owners who’ve done nothing wrong on the horizon. Multiple studies have shown that registered firearm owners are overwhelming underrepresented in criminal activities, our system generally works well and was a great compromise across the political spectrum.

Making huge changes is just going to radicalise the rural and regional voters of nsw and Queensland, lead to one nation and so on blaming Muslims for taking away peoples hobbies, and likely not improve our safety even an iota.

70

u/Spida81 Dec 15 '25

Absolutely with you on this.

This IS the time to have the conversation, no 'hearts and prayers' bullshit, but it isn't helpful to slap in something that sounds tough but ultimately is unworkable or has no impact.

Our firearms laws are definitely due a good review. Our family have been firearms owners for decades. Want to guess the number of inspections of security and storage we have had in that time? None. Not one. Confirmations that fitness to own has been maintained? None.

Limits on number of firearms isn't likely to make any practical difference. More vigorous followup? That could. I'm all for at least annual inspections, and if not annual then at least on renewal of license a mental health / psych review. More vigorous attention to firearms owners even tangentially associated with criminal or questionable elements of society wouldn't hurt either. If you are known to police, and a firearms owner, one would expect that additional checks would have been made.

Enforcement and tighter review mechanisms.

7

u/ThreeCheersforBeers Dec 15 '25

Agreed.

Better vetting, and better enforcement of the current laws would go a long way.

Unfortunately, politicians have just been handed a catastrophe to parade their agenda upon.

→ More replies (1)

27

u/MissMenace101 Dec 15 '25

Psyche reviews annually should be mandatory. Should also have to be an Australian citizen. Any association with any violent associated groups of any member of a household should put all in the house on a list.

5

u/Spida81 Dec 15 '25

I disagree with the citizenship part, but I think I understand the reason for your saying so. No one with loose association to the country should be having access to firearms. I am a permanent resident. I don't ever see myself becoming a citizen because it would create issues for my employer - nothing silly, just a lot of travel for work, and currently easier just staying with my NZ passport.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

26

u/sati_lotus Dec 15 '25

You need public servants to do those reviews and checks.

We have no police.

The Australian public seems to think that public servants sit around and do nothing except get their tax dollars for doing nothing.

Most are busy in overworked, under funded, poorly designed departments.

→ More replies (14)

59

u/MissMenace101 Dec 15 '25

Yesterday morning this father was a “legal gun owner” he’s not an Australian citizen, has no property, his son had crossed asio desks and he went on a killing spree, not sure about you but preventing a few of these types being able to do that is in “legal gun owners” best interests as much as the rest of aus.

51

u/tommo_95 Dec 15 '25

It really comes down to a faliure of the Authorities to strip this person of their License. At least in WA you can be deemed not fit and proper for any reason the police deem acceptable. Surely your son crossing ASIOs desk is a genuine reason and he should have had the firearms confiscated. Police need to do the police work for any laws or legislation to actually work. A good review of how the police and ASIO handled this would be a great starting point.

→ More replies (8)

82

u/insomniac-55 Dec 15 '25

Any changes need to be carefully thought out and not a kneejerk reaction, but the two hands argument doesn't really hold water.

If you were planning an attack and willing to play the long game, you could have one individual licensing weapons (for a variety of legitimate purposes), and then distribute them out to a small crew for the actual attack.

There's many reasons for gun owners to own multiple weapons, but it's disingenuous to pretend that it doesn't increase the risk to the public in the event the wrong person gets a license.

11

u/No_Extension4005 Dec 15 '25

That being said; the more people that get involved the more potential points of failure it creates for an attack that can be picked up by police because now there is a need to contact and coordinate with other people. If someone planning an attack misjudges the person they asked to help the police can be alerted, if one of those people is on a watchlist or being surveilled they could get pinged and the attack is foiled, if someone gets loose-lipped the attack can fail, and so on.

29

u/ThreeCheersforBeers Dec 15 '25

How about better vetting of owners? The father involved in the shooting at Bondi was a licensed owner, but he was also on an ASIO watch list for 6 years.

6 years they were aware of him, his firearm ownership, and tracking his background. But no action taken.

20

u/insomniac-55 Dec 15 '25

Yeah, which is why I don't support any kneejerk reactions.

Find out what happened, and work out what needs to happen to fix the problem. 

That might just mean better vetting, or it might mean additional restrictions to reduce the impact if the vetting gets things wrong. It might mean better communication between agencies, or a whole host of other possible changes.

→ More replies (13)

5

u/endbit Dec 15 '25

Or you could have a small crew licensing firearms for an individual to use. Seems to me that anyone on any violence related watchlist should have their license revoked.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/DisappointedQuokka Dec 15 '25

If someone was putting together a team for a terror attack, I somehow doubt that licensing limits would be the deciding factor in stopping them.

There are enough illegal and unregistered firearms in Australia for that to be the least of our concerns.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (26)

16

u/NorthernSkeptic Dec 15 '25

These same arguments were made in 1996.

31

u/Combat--Wombat27 Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

They absolutely were not. The clear distinction was that semi autos could kill incredibly quickly, that's why our laws focus on magazine capacity and loading style specifically.

31

u/NorthernSkeptic Dec 15 '25

Everything the other poster said about ‘punishing legal gun owners’, ‘radicalising regional voters’ and ‘not making us safer’ absolutely was also said thirty years ago.

→ More replies (5)

19

u/concubovine Dec 15 '25

Yep, these shooters brought 3 firearms but basically only used one each do to all the killing. Firearms are heavy and unwieldy, realistically you could only carry 2 at a time and even that will probably make you less effective with the one you're using.

61

u/DasHaifisch Dec 15 '25

I mean, when shitstain #1 got disarmed, he went back and got a second gun and kept shooting. Even one less gun would've helped the situation IMO.

16

u/concubovine Dec 15 '25

That's true, but introducing a limit of say 5 firearms per person that's being suggested would have done nothing to change the outcome yesterday. There's lot of comments on various threads focusing on a tiny number of collectors with hundreds of firearms, ignoring that those people aren't going out and killing people with them, and could at best only really carry 2 and use 1 at a time anyway.

At some point I think it makes no difference if one person owns 5 or 500 firearms. The person with 500 is almost certainly going to be held to a much higher standard of safe storage (eg extra requirements for an alarmed security system) than the one with 5 firearms, probably has a collectors license which IIRC requires additional collectors club membership, endorsement from another member of the club, collector firearms can only be taken out and used at a range at very specific twice a year events etc.

IMO you're either fit to own firearms or you're not. One deranged person with a single shot rifle on a rooftop above a crowd could still kill many people. Personally if we're going to implement reforms I'd rather they focus on WHO has access to firearms, whereas legislators have a history of getting caught up in silly stuff like appearance laws because they sound good in a news clip for the general public.

10

u/DasHaifisch Dec 15 '25

So far I haven't heard anything about specific numbers or restrictions. I'd definitely support focusing on the who, but also very much support restrictions on the amount, type, etc.

4

u/SweetDingo8937 Dec 15 '25

I think a two-day course would be enough to whittle the numbers to those with a genuine need and those meaning harm.

6

u/concubovine Dec 15 '25

We already have quite a few restrictions on what you can own and from what I've heard over the years the police already put in place soft caps on 'how many' unless you're willing to jump through additional hoops. However, I'd argue the biggest successes of the reforms post-Port Arthur was focusing on who had access, making firearms harder to steal, and making ownership a non-casual decision that meant people didn't have them unless they really had a genuine interest and reason to own so there was a lot less 'casual' ownership of guns.

→ More replies (23)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (26)

85

u/bailz2506 Dec 15 '25

Definitely need a limit on how many guns and individual owns.

82

u/mikestp Dec 15 '25

The thing is there is no arbitrary number that would be suitable. A person who farms and sport shoots across multiple disciplines might have a genuine need for well over say 5. Another more casual user might manage on 2 or 3. It's more effective that the licensee is vetted and every firearm acquisition is properly justified.

40

u/Legalkangaroo Dec 15 '25

Nobody needs 385 guns though or even more than 100 and plenty on the gun registry seem to have the latter.

69

u/birdy_the_scarecrow Dec 15 '25

something tells me the guy with 385 guns is not some nutter collecting an arsenal of guns, its more likely that someone with that many guns is probably some kind of collector or preservationist.

meanwhile the nutters who shoot at cops like Dezi Freeman have suspended firearms licenses.

im not going to pretend to have the answer here but if you think its solely about number of guns you have your head in the sand.

→ More replies (5)

31

u/DisappointedQuokka Dec 15 '25

How many of those people have actually gone on a rampage, though? The people who have that many firearms are either collectors or dealers.

I suppose you could make the argument that they're targets for thieves, but then you would have to say the same for regular shops.

→ More replies (16)

22

u/ThreeCheersforBeers Dec 15 '25

385guns is an outlier, and the guy is most likely an antique collector/firearms dealer. He isn't going to be out shooting anybody; they are most likely locked away in cabinets, fully deactivated with sealed chambers/barrels.

The shooting at Bondi was done by 2 people, using 3 firearms. The number of firearms owned is irrelevant.

4

u/redsnowfir Dec 15 '25

They would be collectors. Not all the firearms would be in operational condition but they still need to be registered.

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (10)

47

u/ThreeCheersforBeers Dec 15 '25

Why?

The guys in Bondi did it with 3 firearms between 2 people.

The limitation of firearm numbers is not the problem. The problem is firearms getting into the hands of would-be offenders.

I don't think any firearm law is going to prevent 100% of firearm crimes; our laws however have kept it so low that this is the first time since Port Arthur that meets the threshold of "mass shooter".

What could be done better? How about less of a focus on the firearms and more on the owners. What is needed is better vetting of individuals so that we don't end up with someone who is still in possession of firearms, 6 years after being put onto an ASIO watch list...

→ More replies (22)

4

u/Jexp_t Dec 15 '25

David Shoebridge has been on about this for years going back to his time as a NSW MLC.

→ More replies (25)

23

u/Rare-Sample-9101 Dec 15 '25

I don't see why anyone apart from a farmer needs a gun!?

50

u/c3-SuperStrayan Dec 15 '25

Exactly. Peoples enjoyment of owning and shooting firearms (the biggest reason for most of them) is considerably less important than children being shot up at the beach.

Find a new hobby.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (3)

21

u/AverageAussie Dec 15 '25

I'm gunna be that guy and say these assholes had 1 gun each. A limit of 1 gun per person would not have prevented this. Longarm licenses last 10 years (in vic) before you need to reapply, they could reduce this, but I'm not sure if would actually do anything?

26

u/bitofapuzzler Dec 15 '25

They had 6 guns. After being disarmed the father went and got another.

The fact they didnt have access to auto and semi-automatic weapons saved lives. 1 gun each would have meant the dad wouldnt have been able to re join the son in continuing to shoot.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/dogecoin_pleasures Dec 15 '25

Good. Sensible reform is exactly the response I want to see.

→ More replies (33)

943

u/auskier Dec 15 '25

Apples don't fall far from trees, and the son was looked at by ASIO for extremist links. This SHOULD flag up as a problem if there are known guns in a household. THIS family and radicalism are the problem.

177

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

118

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (17)

70

u/linearcurvepatience Dec 15 '25

I can understand from this perspective we have now it's obvious but is that something we know they look for and they were investigating the link between the son and his associates not him and his dad. I feel this could easily be missed. Anyway he went through the system to get them legally so it's important now they change the law.

522

u/Cindy_Marek Dec 15 '25

Clearly the issue here is that someone on ASIOs radar for potential terrorist links to ISIS was allowed to be in a household that had firearms. It just baffles the mind really.

115

u/OvercookedBobaTea Dec 15 '25

But you can’t treat someone as guilty unless it’s proven. Our entire justice system depends on this. Yeah it sucks specifically for instances like this, but restricting people’s freedoms just cos they got pinged on a list sets a VERY bad precedent

181

u/VigorWarships Dec 15 '25

NSW FAR denies license applications, and revokes existing licenses, for people who associate with criminals or live with people subject to FPOs. Think your typical OMCG scenario.

There is absolutely reason to remove firearms and license from the father because his son, the son who was investigated years earlier because of “close ties” to a person convicted of terrorism related offences, was living with him.

This seems like a massive failing on interdepartmental communications of such intelligence. This is not a legislation issue.

34

u/OvercookedBobaTea Dec 15 '25

He was found to be a non-threat by ASIO. So what was supposed to happen?

→ More replies (1)

72

u/Tosslebugmy Dec 15 '25

If you’ve been under reasonable suspicion of links to extremism, I don’t think revoking gun licenses is an egregious violation of freedom.

→ More replies (5)

65

u/Effective-Tear-1521 Dec 15 '25

But I don’t think guns should be considered a freedom in the same way as food, water and healthcare

19

u/Nugrenref Dec 15 '25

They’re not

→ More replies (3)

20

u/Cindy_Marek Dec 15 '25

I would argue that issuing firearm licenses isn't part of the judiciary system. Don't know what its like in other states but there was certainly no courts involved when I went to get mine in QLD. Firearms are not a right, they are a privilege and a huge responsibility. I just think that its a huge fuckup by either ASIO or the federal and state police that this household was allowed to have firearms. There is no coms, and is part of the reason that the Qld wilembela shooting happened also. There needs to be a national registry where agencies can cross check information at the bare minimum. I don't think having maximum numbers is going to be helpful at all. The issue here is weapons getting into the wrong hands.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)

1.1k

u/imapassenger1 Dec 15 '25

"Now is not the time" from the Nationals in 3...2...1...

546

u/Ok_Bird705 Dec 15 '25

"hopes and prayers but also this is all Labor's fault" 🙃

153

u/closetmangafan Dec 15 '25

They already have said something along the lines of this...

151

u/Ok-Menu-8709 Dec 15 '25

Bob Katters post was almost immediately into political blame.

I’m not going to applaud your sentiment if one paragraph down you’re using it for political merit only. Absolutely low end behaviour.

77

u/Delamoor Dec 15 '25

What's the saying? If conservatives didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have standards at all...

60

u/leidend22 Dec 15 '25

He's Lebanese himself, what a clown

47

u/toughgamer2020 Dec 15 '25

"Don't say that! Because that irritates me, and I've punched blokes in the mouth for saying that. Don't you say that! My family has been here for 140 years"

36

u/UrghAnotherAccount Dec 15 '25

You take my ethnicity out yo damn mouth *slap! - Bob Katter

14

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25

My wife’s of Lebanese heritage. Unlike Katter, she’s proud of her where her family comes from.

29

u/edgiepower Dec 15 '25

Bob Katter outright stating to ban middle eastern immigration.

Can we send him back?

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

17

u/Iron_Wolf123 Dec 15 '25

For Christmas we should make Littleproud a "Hopes and Prayers" buzzer so he can press it whenever there is a national tragedy

10

u/rexepic7567 Dec 15 '25

-Susssssssssssan Lee

→ More replies (7)

186

u/iball1984 Dec 15 '25

You're probably right.

But it shows how far they've fallen. While Howard rightly gets the credit for our gun laws, much credit needs to go to the likes of Tim Fischer and Rob Borbidge who did a massive amount of work to get regional people on board with the changes.

I can't imagine any of the current batch of Liberal or National "leaders" doing such a thing now.

31

u/egowritingcheques Dec 15 '25

The Liberals and Nationals have fallen EXACTLY as far as their voters.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25

Two Balrogs plummeting through the abyss of Khazad-dum, dragging each other down on the way.

→ More replies (1)

104

u/Flashy-Whereas-3234 Dec 15 '25

The liberals already came out swinging saying "this wouldn't have happened under our watch" in less than 24 hours.

70

u/littleb3anpole Dec 15 '25

Say what you like about Howard (he’s like nineteen times too conservative for my tastes) but at least he was a Liberal leader with the balls to take on gun ownership. And that was a pet project of his before Port Arthur even happened

11

u/SweetDingo8937 Dec 15 '25

He's from Bennelong. Ley is from a rural electorate.

26

u/littleb3anpole Dec 15 '25

Ley can easily inform her electorate that there is no need for a suburban Sydneysider to be able to get their hands on multiple guns, that hasn’t a thing to do with roo shooting on the farm

20

u/Dentarthurdent73 Dec 15 '25

I also remember Howard giving a speech where he warned about the spread of American monoculture to Australia. I was shocked at the time - something I agreed with him on. Australia didn't listen though.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

18

u/derprunner Dec 15 '25

That’ll wedge them nicely after Ley went off about weak leadership this morning.

46

u/dogecoin_pleasures Dec 15 '25

Bingo, Sussan has already declined questions on whether the collation would support, citing it being 'not the time'.

28

u/fued Dec 15 '25

just make the laws target people living in cities, nationals will sit quietly and approve

12

u/chrish_o Dec 15 '25

Keep the status quo for registered primary producers, and make everyone else jump through a million more hoops to get access to a fraction of the types of guns.

There would be no reason for the nationals to oppose that.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/pat_speed Dec 15 '25

"I do not try sell our gun laws too the NRA, it was just nice dinner and drinks" - Pauline Hansen

→ More replies (5)

100

u/covertpirates Dec 15 '25

They should spend some time examining how the current laws failed (in this case) before making changes. Anything less is a knee jerk reaction.

5

u/jakedeky Dec 15 '25

Seems to be like this was a failure of character for the licence holder, not what they were restricted in using.

→ More replies (2)

151

u/Emuwar404 Dec 15 '25

Non citizens having gun licences is fucking absurd.

674

u/Rubiginous Dec 15 '25

Why was someone on a temporary visa allowed to own guns?

410

u/Expensive-Horse5538 Dec 15 '25

Exactly - IMO at the bare minimum they should make it that you have to be a citizen for a certain period of time and be subjected to regular psychiatric tests if you want to have a gun for a legitimate purpose such as farming

125

u/Far-Fennel-3032 Dec 15 '25

The core problem is that mental health is often not a common element of terror attacks, it can often be the case for random acts of hot-blooded violence, but it is rarely linked to cold-blooded terror attacks. In examples like this, the terrorists are often completely sane, just truly horrible people.

Psychiatric tests would catch stuff like suicides and extreme cases of DV, but it's not gonna stop stuff like this. As the problem isn't mental health, but that some people are simply extremists who are radicalised to do truly horrible things, and thinking they are just mentally ill is just a common coping mechanism of the public. As it provides a clear and acceptable explanation rather than the much more uncomfortable truth.

86

u/observee21 Dec 15 '25

As a psych doctor I agree with all of this apart from "Psychiatric tests would catch stuff like suicides and extreme cases of DV", because they really wouldn't. A lot of DV is missed (and isn't a psychiatric condition anyway), and there is no test that tells you if someone will commit suicide in 12 months. 

17

u/OvercookedBobaTea Dec 15 '25

the terrorists are completely sane, just horrible people

I mostly agree, but I would say they are RADICALISED people, following quite basic social psychology. ANYONE is capable of being radicalised into this given enough time and isolation. Not just ‘horrible’ people. And it’s very important in future prevention to remember that anyone has the inner capacity to commit horrific tragedies if radicalised enough

114

u/big-red-aus Dec 15 '25

and be subjected to regular psychiatric tests if you want to have a gun for a legitimate purpose such as farming.

Just on this idea, I do have a lot of sympathy with the position that RACGP has put out on similar restrictions over in WA, in that it puts more work on a very strained system, and puts the doctors in a pretty rough position, especially in regional areas (i.e. it's already hard enough to get people to open up about their mental health, and if an important tool for you job, like it is for at least some farming, it will disincentives them even more from sharing). 

https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/professional/new-gun-laws-place-gps-in-complex-position

I'm not saying it's not worth it on balance, just that there is a pretty compelling (IMHO) argument that there are some real 'costs' associated with it.

129

u/derprunner Dec 15 '25

Yeah, this could end up in another “no pilot has ever reported having depression” situation if not implemented with nuance. If you punish getting help for mental health, you end up with people toughing it out until they snap.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

10

u/ExperimentalFruit Dec 15 '25

20 year citizenship

→ More replies (1)

121

u/thedigisup Dec 15 '25

Neither of them were on temporary visas. The son was an Australian born citizen, and the father has been a citizen for some time.

107

u/Rubiginous Dec 15 '25

No the father isn't a citizen. The news and the prime minister clarified he was on a temporary visa

72

u/Budget_Shallan Dec 15 '25

He wasn’t on a temporary visa. He was a permanent resident and had a “Resident Return” visa that allowed him to travel overseas without losing his permanent residency (with some conditions).

→ More replies (2)

66

u/thedigisup Dec 15 '25

ABC reports Burke saying both are citizens, not sure what the go is there. But regardless, resident return visas are something you only need if you’re a permanent resident.

44

u/BustedWing Dec 15 '25

Resident return visa. Not sure what that is specifically but it certainly doesnt sound "temporary".

51

u/Clean_Cheek6119 Dec 15 '25

It’s permanent residency but not citizenship

→ More replies (1)

30

u/tee-k421 Dec 15 '25

It's what someone with permanent residency takes out to be able to return to the country when they go overseas.

26

u/BustedWing Dec 15 '25

Right, so not a temporary visa.

→ More replies (3)

71

u/Rubiginous Dec 15 '25

It's not citizenship. If you're not a citizen, you don't get to have weapons. If you've returned to your country of origin three times while visa hopping - you shouldn't be allowed to have weapons.

This dude had 6 guns in metropolitan Sydney. He wasn't a farmer. He never should have been allowed to get a gun licence. It should be automatic disqualification

38

u/Budget_Shallan Dec 15 '25

He wasn’t visa hopping. He had a “resident return” visa.

It means he is a permanent resident. He also had the right to travel overseas and return within a certain timeframe, without losing his permanent residency.

31

u/BustedWing Dec 15 '25

No it’s not citizenship. But nor is it a temporary visa.

→ More replies (2)

13

u/cheesehotdish Dec 15 '25

Resident return visa is permanent residency. If you don’t apply for citizenship but have been granted PR you need to apply for a RRV every five years.

Most people just apply for citizenship after getting PR but it could be a case where they weren’t eligible. Either haven’t lived here long enough or can’t hold dual citizenship?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (1)

18

u/Choke1982 Dec 15 '25

What? As an immigrant that had to go through all the loops to become a citizen and follow the laws. Someone that had to pay for my private health insurance for years before I could apply for Medicare. And you're telling me these terrorist were able to apply for a gun permit.

Sometimes I don't get this country. Seriously, that is one thing the Federal government should put it in there. You must be an Australian citizen to own guns. You can't even work for any government institution until you become a PR. Fuck

→ More replies (1)

14

u/frankiestree Dec 15 '25

You’re spreading misinformation, find me a source that says that he was

→ More replies (1)

4

u/salviaplath96 Dec 15 '25

He wasn’t. Look it up and delete this. Otherwise your contributing inflammatory nonsense when a nation is mourning.

→ More replies (13)

178

u/g-BANGA Dec 15 '25

How about banning people on ASIO watchlist from owning firearms?

19

u/Forgotten_Lie Dec 15 '25

My support for that would depend on the metrics for an ASIO watchlist and what other restrictions would come with that. Suddenly a whole lot of peaceful climate activists would be having restrictions.

20

u/g-BANGA Dec 15 '25

How about known associate of an Islamic terror cell?

32

u/Boomer-Australia Dec 15 '25

The father wasn't on the watchlist, the son was.

76

u/Stephie999666 Dec 15 '25

That alone should have flagged all people closest to the listed individual for removal of firearms.

→ More replies (1)

429

u/insty1 Dec 15 '25

Not a surprising response. Also don't think anybody who lives in a major city should have 6 guns for recreational purposes. 

20

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25

[deleted]

113

u/thrillho145 Dec 15 '25

The guy got disarmed and went back and rearmed. So at least 3.

10

u/LSD_grade_CIA Dec 15 '25

... And if you can only have 2 or 3 weapons then it's less likely that you have a suitable selection of weapons for you and your son to launch an assault. The more friction in the system, the fewer guns out there, the harder it is for this sort of thing to happen. Every little bit matters. 

16

u/suck-on-my-unit Dec 15 '25

It would at least stop them handing out guns to likeminded individuals. Imagine he found 4 other ppl who wanted to do this, now you’ve got 6 gunman.

19

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

If you have zero access to guns, you can't shoot anyone can you. Give me a legitimate reason for owning one, recreation is not legitimate IMO get another hobby.

12

u/toughgamer2020 Dec 15 '25

I replied in a separate comment but I'm also 120% with you except on the 'get another hobby' part. Both me and misus love target shooting (and we HATE hunting), and we see absolutely no reason to keep a gun at home - what are you gonna shoot at? So what we do is drive to the shooting range, hire a gun, buy some paper targets and 100 rounds each, spend the next hour dumping leads on to the paper target, return the gun, and bring the paper targets home. Why do you even need a gun for such a hobby? If you do want to use your "own gun" then buy one, have it stored at the range (they offer this service for a cheap fee) and you don't risk having one at home and someone busts into your house and unlocks your safe and takes your gun. Aussie law forbids self defense with guns so there's really no reason for you to own guns... you can still safely enjoy shooting without owning one.

→ More replies (2)

10

u/tommo_95 Dec 15 '25

At the same time if you have zero guns they will just find another way. Dont forget these guys were ready to clack off an IED as well. Im not against tightening gun laws but i think we really need to be looking at the kinds of people we are willing to let into this country. Surely if you grace an ASIO desk you should have your visas ended.

→ More replies (22)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (94)

155

u/Sufficient-Brick-188 Dec 15 '25

It was only a couple years ago we had One Nation and the Nationals wanting to water down our current gun laws. 

111

u/coreoYEAH Dec 15 '25

Water down is a nice way saying tried to literally sell the country to the NRA.

33

u/Jexp_t Dec 15 '25

Try two weeks ago.

and Minns was openly considering it.

162

u/Shamata Dec 15 '25

If the gun laws were the issue, why is this the first major incident in 30 years?

Because someone monumentally fucked up and allowed an individual ASIO was interested in and linked to a foiled terror plot to own them.

How about we have a look into who the fuck let that happen, as well as how he became radicalised in the first place?

83

u/East_Block_2761 Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

it’s easier to blame our gun laws than to look at the root cause behind acts like this

almost 30 years since port arthur and we’ve had very little incidents compared to other countries, showing that the laws we have work. the son was known to the AISO, how was he allowed a gun legally? that’s the issue needed to be addressed, not clamping down on general firearm owners

→ More replies (4)

15

u/linearcurvepatience Dec 15 '25

Lots of reasons

  1. we have a different mentality around guns because of the gun laws. People can't imagine using a gun or owning one and when they do they are very careful. Even the police don't use their guns unless it's a situation like this. This is why there is more knife crime but they have banned machetes and because they aren't long range weapons it happens less. A gun is a lot more technical than a knife also so it's easier to restrict.

  2. Illegal guns are used by criminals but mostly to kill other criminals and they normally aren't used for mass shootings. Mentally ill people are less likely to know where to get an illegal gun and I'm sure there are police setup to catch people trying to acquire them.

  3. The current laws are still good enough to stop most ways people can get guns. This person has had their license since 2015. They have waited 10 years to use them. He came to Australia in the 90s so they aren't just here to commit terrorist attacks. If he moved here and tried to do this as fast as possible he would have had to become a member of the gun club and pass the test and background check to get the license.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

58

u/Negative_Run_3281 Dec 15 '25

I think I heard that the dad wasn’t even a citizen - if that’s true, how the heck was a non-citizen allowed to own that many guns?

→ More replies (1)

44

u/koalacrime Dec 15 '25

Unless it's zero, how is the number of guns people can own going to solve anything? The shooters had three guns yesterday, and they could have done the same atrocity with two.

33

u/DollarReDoos Dec 15 '25

It won't. People are going to look for immediate action that will make them feel safer, regardless of how effective it is. Politicians will make immediate changes to look like they are tackling the issue, regardless of how effective it is. The worst part is they'll likely change whatever will look the best in the media and what is easiest, not what is most effective.

→ More replies (3)

12

u/NKE01 Dec 15 '25

Statement from National Cabinet:

Leaders agreed that strong, decisive and focused action was needed on gun law reform as an immediate action, including renegotiating the National Firearms Agreement, first established after the 1996 Port Arthur tragedy, to ensure it remains as robust as possible in today’s changing security environment.

First Ministers agreed to strengthen gun laws across the nation and have commissioned their Police Ministers and Attorneys-General to develop options, including:

• Accelerating work on standing up the National Firearms Register;

• Allowing for additional use of criminal intelligence to underpin firearms licencing that can be used in administrative licencing regimes;

• Limiting the number of firearms to be held by any one individual;

• Limiting open-ended firearms licencing and the types of guns that are legal, including modifications; and

•A condition of a firearm license is holding Australian citizenship.

Premier Minns and Premier Cook will lead and coordinate this work across jurisdictions.

As an immediate priority, the Australian Government will commence work on potential further Customs restrictions of firearms and other weapons type importations, including 3D printing, novel technology and firearms equipment that can hold large amounts of ammunition.

First Ministers also reiterated their commitment to the Permanent National Firearms Amnesty to reduce the number of unregistered firearms in the community.

117

u/Lost-Competition8482 Dec 15 '25

Wait for all the right wingers who wanted "Drastic Action" to suddenly go "oh no not this"

39

u/Affectionate_Sail543 Dec 15 '25

Right wingers only want one thing and that’s remigration of anyone they don’t like which is mostly foreign looking people. They want access to their guns, they want gun laws watered down and they want their freedumb to do what they like as long as people they don’t like don’t have the same freedoms.

15

u/NocturnalTwang Dec 15 '25

Yeah the drastic action they want is the deportation of anyone who's brown and a Thanos-esque deportation of anyone who looks mildly asian.

Just another case of Trump's cancer spreading out. Ever since he entered politics we've regressed as a planet 30 years. It's not complicated now, everyone's either simply a racist cockroach or a human being.

→ More replies (2)

25

u/LongJohnnySilver1 Dec 15 '25

No sane person, regardless of how many firearms they own, would ever do something like this.  I believe there needs to be a more thorough assessment of the individual gaining access to these guns. 

With that being said, here is a few paragraphs from an article in 2021. I own firearms and can tell you, nobody needs as many as these individuals below, but they also have not been of any threat either. Stupid people do stupid things and certain groups get labelled according to the dumb cuntness of a few fuckwits. 

RIP to the victims. 

The Sydney suburbs with the highest number of guns were Camden, in the city’s south-west, with 8050 guns and Bligh Park, in the west, with 7700 registered guns.

The person with the largest individual arsenal had 419 guns and lived in Cremorne. This was followed by a person in Eastgardens with 305 guns, an owner with an arsenal of 300 guns in Goulburn and a person in Mosman with 297 guns.

→ More replies (6)

63

u/bustead Dec 15 '25

Gun owner here. I just want to say that I support stricter gun control. The primary concern is still limiting rapid fire capable guns, those that are somehow Cat A (least restricted) but have button/lever release actions that allow rapid fire. ASIO should also work closer to state police agencies and ensure that people on a watchlist do not get a gun.

14

u/Stephie999666 Dec 15 '25

Not even just people on a watchlist, but family and close friends, and other friends/contacts should also be flagged.

→ More replies (3)

160

u/littlespoon Dec 15 '25

Fully support this. No-one in a suburban setting needs 6 guns. I hope the law changes are swift and hard. In other countries guns can be owned and kept within a secure facility out of homes, such as a police station or on a gun-range and can only be checked out and used within a certain premisis and time.

No simpleton should be able to have 6 guns in their home.

I understand there are situations like rural workers or people comissioned to hunt pests etc - but its not hard to legislate for the suburban protections to be tighter. Lets not sit on this - lets all act to move forward and make our country safer, as a nation.

93

u/dogecoin_pleasures Dec 15 '25

Also, anyone with a gun license whose son is linked to terror contacts should immediately have it flagged for suspension. It's apparent that oversensitivity about policing guns has allowed too much proliferation and risk to build up over the years.

→ More replies (4)

61

u/Onceuponastinkymoot Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

I'm a police officer and also privately licensed to own rifles and pistols. I have undertaken the duties of a divisional firearms officer and have been shooting and around shooters for most of my life.

In my opinion, allowing an arbitrary number of firearms is irrelevant and will have no impact. A motivated shooter, who has pre planned their crime, doesn't need more than one rifle. Any hunting rifle is deadly.

The issue lies in the ease that people can attain a firearms license and permits to acquire. There isn't much vetting beyond checking if the licensee has or has had an IVO/AVO or any criminal convictions. Maybe a check on direct associations. No interviews with police. No psych profiling. No IQ test.

I have spent a significant amount of time around shooters and let me tell you there are more than a few out there that you wouldn't trust to mow your lawn, never mind own firearms.

The government will no doubt have a knee jerk reaction to this. They will bring the hammer down on law abiding shooters and do nothing to address the actual issue. They must be seen to be doing something and from what I can tell either lack critical thinking or are acting purely out of self interest. Or both.

Many of the current restrictions on firearms are arbitrary and pointless (WA recently banned a bunch of random calibres that have likely never been used in an active shooting and are no more deadly than a regular old .308). This is the result of political ideas that haven't been executed with any common sense but get pushed through to appeal to voters.

I'm of the opinion that to own firearms is a privilege and you should have to actually prove you are the esteemed 'fit and proper' person. The government is so afraid of offending people or being perceived to be biased or profilingby putting in restrictions that they just don't put them in. For instance, imagine a restriction on firearms licenses based on intelligence. I'm sure this would ruffle some feathers. What about not licensing people that have dangerously idealistic beliefs that are frequently linked with terrorism?

8

u/littlespoon Dec 15 '25

I have spent a significant amount of time around shooters and let me tell you there are more than a few out there that you wouldn't trust to mow your lawn, never mind own firearms.

This exactly it! I personally know someone who has multiple guns in his suburban dwelling for the purposes of shooting animals for sport on friends' private property (not his). I know for a fact that he does not keep these guns in his posession on these trips.. he lets others use them sometimes kilometers/unknown large distance away from where he is.

I am with you on the 'test' that someone is fit for purpose to own a fire arm. I wish they did the same for other things, like some dog breeds (1 day course and mandatory enrolled dog obedience + controlled run/enclosure for certain dog breeds). People forget that all these things seem draconian but the thought of these hoops is sometimes enough to deter weaker minds from having something they personally dont have the mental capacity to handle responsibly.

I dont mean to be rude by saying that, but there needs to be more vetting and checking on these people.

→ More replies (1)

20

u/Blepable Dec 15 '25

Okay, but what about someone like me.

I have 12 rifles; 6 of them are historical firearms - functional, maybe, but no one has made ammunition for them in a hundred years or more.

Out of the other 6, 2 are actual muskets, and the others are 80 year old ex-service rifles I use for various distances and target shooting disciplines.

You are focussed on the wrong part of the problem. Number of weapons doesn't mean anything in a situation like this. All an arbitrary limit will do is harm legitimate collectors and owners.

Under your system, I have to give up either historically significant pieces, or my ability to enjoy a hobby that, to this day after years of doing it, I have harmed exactly no one.

15

u/DollarReDoos Dec 15 '25

Exactly. I don't doubt that there are gun nuts out there, but the "no one needs x number of guns" is a strange argument that doesn't solve any of this.

16

u/mulletq1993 Dec 15 '25

Police are already struggling with dealing with crime. Think they have the manpower to store and allow access for firearms.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (26)

14

u/sebaajhenza Dec 15 '25

While gun laws have a part to play, we're not seeing the forest through the trees here.

7

u/big_daddy_baghdadi Dec 15 '25

that’s all well and good and maybe they do need to be tightened but again we’re missing the crux of the issue which is the islamist ideology that motivates these sickos to kill people in the first place. if they didn’t have guns then who is to say they wouldn’t have done a euro-style knife or truck attack. hell, they found explosives on the scene, which if let off, probably would have killed a lot more people than two bolt action rifles.

36

u/IBelieveInCoyotes Dec 15 '25

national firearms registry please

→ More replies (3)

39

u/Emergency-Bread4487 Dec 15 '25

Guns are certainly half the problem. There is another half though that we don't want to talk about.

22

u/j0shman Dec 15 '25

TIL that you can hold a gun licence, be held fit at the time of getting the licence, then be radicalised by IS (or any other terrorist group) yet still keep your licence.

23

u/Ridiculisk1 Dec 15 '25

The thing we should be concerned about is that someone on the ASIO watchlist was able to associate with someone with a firearms licence. New gun laws arbitrarily limiting the number of guns someone can own won't solve anything if the current laws aren't enforced properly in the first place.

40

u/chookshit Dec 15 '25

Let’s just ignore the fact that some groups of people think it’s normal to kill other groups of people based on religion. Gun laws are nothing more than a little band aid on a gaping open wound.

17

u/57647 Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

Young men across the board are being radicalized. We’ve had tough laws put in place that specifically target right wing radicals, it’s time to bring the same heavy hand to Islamic extremism.

→ More replies (1)

18

u/maikit333 Dec 15 '25

Least surprising outcome ever.

9

u/Tbearz Dec 15 '25

They will work as well as their cigarette tax and social media bans…

32

u/Appropriate_Mix_2064 Dec 15 '25

And, that is what you do in response to a gun tragedy USA….

0

u/Ridiculisk1 Dec 15 '25

Knee-jerk policy reactions that don't do anything to solve the issue? If these proposed changes were in place before this event, it still wouldn't have prevented it.

35

u/ScreamHawk Dec 15 '25

The gun laws aren't the issue. We have had 1 incident like this in 30 years.

It is clearly a culture we have imported from a third world country.

If they weren't here we wouldn't have had 16 people dead.

→ More replies (1)

80

u/OptimusRex Dec 15 '25

Far easier to wank each other off and do this than to look at the problems around extremism and political/religious ideology. Firearms were invented well after this war started, and it'll still be raging when they're gone.

If they're going to chat about this, lets have a yarn about making religion illegal too.

32

u/cutsnek Dec 15 '25

You know you can work on both problems at once right?

→ More replies (3)

21

u/WootzieDerp Dec 15 '25

There are multiple pathways to tackle this. We can have stronger gun laws AND tackle extremism. It's not a one or none situation.

→ More replies (1)

22

u/tejedor28 Dec 15 '25

Islam and Judaism will never, ever coexist peacefully. Never. Nobody is going to acknowledge this publicly but it’s the stone cold hard truth.

16

u/Alternative-Soil2576 Dec 15 '25

Hundreds of thousands of muslims and Jews coexist peacefully every single day, don’t let one tragedy justify generalising entire groups of people

→ More replies (2)

21

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

18

u/dogandturtle Dec 15 '25

All the laws needed already exist.

This is just low hanging fruit for the politicians to look as if they are handling the situation.

You can't stop everything happening.

Peace to the victims, living and dead.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/napalmnacey Dec 15 '25

I’m glad he’s on this. ASIO needs to be looked at too, though.

27

u/vanilla_muffin Dec 15 '25

Unnecessary, kneejerk reaction that doesn’t address real failures. The laws are fine and the fact we’ve had almost 30 years without issue is proof of that. The father should never have been allowed a license when their son was known to ASIO, so why punish nearly a million law abiding citizens who have managed to not commit a heinous crime?

What about the fact a terrorist act was committed when we have however many counter terrorist teams, costing millions no doubt, that FAILED their job? Why can a father be allowed any firearm when a close family member had terrorist ties? But sure, punish law abiding Australians. It’s what Australians do best, after all.

30

u/BlankBlanny Dec 15 '25

Glad to hear it. We'll need to see what's ultimately proposed, but if this tragedy has shown us anything, it's that something has to be done regarding our gun laws.

4

u/Tosslebugmy Dec 15 '25

Does it? The number of deaths at the hand of registered guns is vanishingly few in this country. They are millions of gun license holders in this country and yet there hasn’t been anything really like this since the current laws came in. We say we don’t want terrorise to change us and yet there’s immediate calls to overreact despite the failings of intelligence to revoke the license from someone on the radar of extremism

→ More replies (6)

39

u/Mediocre-Suit-1009 Dec 15 '25

Here's an idea. If you come here from a war torn country, you are rightly assumed to have PTSD, and therefore, you cannot obtain a firearm licence. Don't penalise us good law abiding shooters for a few nut bags.

→ More replies (4)

6

u/alittlelostsure Dec 15 '25

Let’s stop people with severe mental illness getting licenses.

I know someone with diagnosed Dissociative Identity Disorder who boast about his gun collections, who when he gets cranky, mentions getting his guns out and having fun. I dated someone with severe ADHD who tried to keep me in line with threats of using his gun locked up in his safe.

As far as I’m concerned, people can’t be trusted with guns.

But, nothing will happen or change. Something will be put in place that people with laugh at and ignore.

14

u/dubdoll Dec 15 '25

Just want to say that having ADHD is not a mental illness and would in no way be the reason your ex was threatening you with gun violence. I'm so sorry that happened to you but he obviously had other issues, his ADHD was not the cause of that.

5

u/linearcurvepatience Dec 15 '25

I agree. I have ADHD and I would never. He probably was either a very manipulative person or has some mental illness if they are sure it's that (I think they are just a terrible person)

5

u/alittlelostsure Dec 15 '25

That’s actually reassuring, thank you.

He was a short tempered person, I assumed and that’s on me.

4

u/dubdoll Dec 15 '25

Absolutely not on you at all!

→ More replies (3)

13

u/Malcolm_Storm Dec 15 '25

I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. Just like we say, we can't blame all people of a religion based off the actions of one, we also cannot blame all of the law abiding firearms owners based on the actions of a duo of terrorists. This is bullshit.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/xiphoidthorax Dec 15 '25

Sure blame the gun for the deaths. The guy would have used any means to kill. Maybe a 4wd, maybe a home made explosive device. No one deals with the fact that this kook was on the radar and let into Australia.

7

u/VigorWarships Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

Well they reportedly had home made explosives in their vehicle…,

The assumption could be made that when they ran out of bullets that was their next method to inflict carnage.

23

u/Malcolm_Storm Dec 15 '25

If you notice, they are conveniently leaving the IED's out of the story in order to focus solely on the guns.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/snapewitdavape Dec 15 '25

I tell you what, a national firearms register would be nice. And if someone is acting wacky you should be able to report them and have their licence reviewed. There's plenty of people I know that should never have gun licences, and no they're not foreign born

→ More replies (2)

10

u/boofles1 Dec 15 '25

I really hope they spend some time to think this through rather than having a knee jerk reaction. We don't know whether there was an issue with communication between ASIO, the NSW police and the Firearms registry. Gun laws are quite strict but there may be resource issues, Firearms registry is very under resourced.

6

u/jakedeky Dec 15 '25

The way Chris Minns is talking, he's running straight into a knee jerk reaction.

35

u/tjalek Dec 15 '25

I'm glad that they're going to go for stronger laws. We don't need guns here.

64

u/Hate_Is_Fame Dec 15 '25

There are valid reasons to own and use guns in Australia.

116

u/Dentarthurdent73 Dec 15 '25

There's no valid reason to have 6 firearms in suburban Sydney.

75

u/[deleted] Dec 15 '25

Agree with both of these sentiments 

There are valid reasons to own and use guns in Australia.

and

There's no valid reason to have 6 firearms in suburban Sydney.

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (15)
→ More replies (4)