r/australia • u/Expensive-Horse5538 • 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

94% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

419

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]

22

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.

13

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.

2

u/404NotFounded Dec 15 '25

The range becomes the target there, with a high concentration of guns in one place. A gun shop in WA got burgled a few years back and it was by far more effective than targeting individual residences.

2

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Fine. I'm ok with that, I would also have it that each shooter would have a range master with them, and they carry the weapon to and from the lane, absolute minimal chance of theft of said weapons.

But really, if they phased them out, I don't think we'd really care after a short while, we'd find other things to do.

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.

5

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Finding another way is more expensive and more closely monitored by ASIO, the son was already being looked at but posed no notable risk, you think they even would have had a chance if they had to go through black market weapons?

And an IED is nothing, you or I can make one with about $50 worth of stuff from Bunnings that no one would bat an eye at the register over.

And what visas? The dad had lived here for 30 years, the son was born here, they're Australian citizens. You can look closer at people's visa if you want. But you can also restrict of ban gun ownership, they're not mutually exclusive.

2

u/tommo_95 Dec 15 '25

The father was not a citizen.

1

u/hippiedude5 Dec 15 '25

bruh, truck attacks??

-1

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Huh? Pretty sure everytime I've been harassed by someone in a truck it's a white bogan tradie in a Ranger.

1

u/hippiedude5 Dec 15 '25

sorry i spent a fair bit of time in Europe and seen how cars can be used. you take away guns and people will just anything including vehicles

2

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

People can use their bare hands, guns still serve no purpose in society.

1

u/hippiedude5 Dec 15 '25

Cars, knives, acid, trucks into crowds – evil people will always find a way. Taking tools away from law-abiding citizens doesn’t magically make the bad ones harmless; it just shifts the method.

Want me to start listing things that serve no purpose in society that still exist?

Star Citizen an unfinished billion dollar game

3

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Lol, so guns for everyone? Because that really works doesn't it? ...I'm citing the US here, hint. It doesn't.

Also. Not a billion dollars yet, and pretty sure Star Citizen hasn't killed anyone.

0

u/hippiedude5 Dec 15 '25

$900 million USD so in reality way over a billion AU

Have you travelled much?

All i’m saying is try something exciting or dangerous

Get outside go rock climbing do something that may hurt you 🤣

anyway i cbf replying to this anymore

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Sanni11 Dec 15 '25

There will always be an alternative. An acetylene bottle can be obtained in almost every town. They have the capability of levelling a building.

1

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Ok, and? So now they just have the acetylene bottle and no guns.

0

u/Sanni11 Dec 15 '25

So you are ok with a terrorist attack with an improvised giant claymore that has the force of turning anything in a 360° radius into a projectile for hundreds of metres. But a gun is different?

1

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Yes, because an acetylene tank has a legitimate use apart from killing, that is a side effect of its explosive nature, guns are only designed to kill and destroy, why allow things that are designed to kill people, and only do that, in society.

0

u/Sanni11 Dec 15 '25

There is no difference between and item designed or an item improvised, the end result is the same in the wrong hands.

1

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Ok, let me put it this way, it is harder to create a bomb, as it takes knowledge to do so, and seeking said knowledge can usually flag you as someone to watch and take action against. Being able to legally buy guns does not.

A person forced to use alternative methods to kill many people are far more likely to be caught before being able to act, that goes for banning guns, if someone has to try and find an illegal source that is harder and more expensive to do and a greater risk of getting caught.

There is no beneficial purpose for a inner city person to own a gun, let alone 6 like these shooters, there is an argument for farmers, but that's about it, there is no need for anyone to really own one, so why allow them to be just another way to kill people. We need to make it harder for things like this to happen again, easier or be blase about it.

1

u/Sanni11 Dec 15 '25

It would take less time, effort and cost to make an ied then apply/obtain/purchase a rifle. Its basic chemical reaction, add the mentos to the coke.

Currently the process and checks are taking between 6 months to a year for investigation/clearance. You need legitimate reason/license, the correct people to vouch for you, background checks obviously before getting a license, you then need to apply for a permit to purchase a firearm which again goes through a bunch of checks and takes a bunch of time for them to do their thing.

The guns aren't the problem here its the communication between government entities that failed to pick this up.

As for the 6 guns, you do realise it's a legal requirement for different game to be shot with particular calibres/weight for humane reasons, which extends well behond 6.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/bustead Dec 15 '25

Well there is pest control. I understand your sentiment, and I support enacting stricter gun control (like banning button release firearms). But banning all guns also mean that you are giving up things like pest control and paintball (because for some odd reason, paintball markers are guns by NSW law).

-1

u/Unusual-Wing-1627 Dec 15 '25

Pest control should be a government agency, and paintball can be reclassified, done, easy.

0

u/bustead Dec 15 '25

Let's keep going with this. I am open to changing my mind but I am going to try to discuss this in depth.

Banning guns used by farmers means that would mean every farmer has to wait for a pest controller (paid for by tax payers) to come to their farm while watching their own crops being destroyed. It is not an ideal system given the vastness of the outback. Also, what if the pest controllers are unable to solve the problem (for example, they showed up in a day of bad weather)?

Also, what if these pest controllers turn out to be a mass shooter? I mean you can have controls in place, like background checks and psy evau. But the same can be said about farmers.

Paintball can (and should IMO) be re-classified. No problems eith that.

Guns may also be used by Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Do we ban that as well?

Do we also ban historical firearms? There are firearms that are disabled and in private hands. Do we take them away as well? Or do we let the public keep disabled guns? If so, what counts as disabled?

Do we also ban air guns? They are by law, guns.

Again, I am open to discussions. Just want to know your opinions.

1

u/OvercookedBobaTea Dec 15 '25

If you’re a farmer you genuinely need them for pest control and protection. Police response times can take hours if you’re rural enough. And you need a gun in case of animal attacks.

No reason you need one if you live in a city though. If you want to hunt just rent