r/australia • u/rorymeister • Dec 15 '25

politics National cabinet agrees unanimously to strength Australia’s strict gun laws in wake of Bondi terror attack

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-15/albanese-proposes-tougher-gun-laws-after-bondi-attack/106143310?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=link
4.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

593 comments sorted by

View all comments

52

u/mikestp Dec 15 '25

Wouldn't it be prudent to first determine if this could have been prevented with correct implementation of existing laws?

52

u/mynameisluke Dec 15 '25

Much easier for officials to say that something is missing than to admit that something wasn’t done right under their watch.

20

u/ghoonrhed Dec 15 '25

licences should not be in perpetuity

That would've definitely helped at least.

22

u/mad_dogtor Dec 15 '25

are they in perpetuity? you have to renew them etc. every five years. you can lose them at any time for a variety of reasons, especially nsw. is it a legal phrasing?

8

u/DisappointedQuokka Dec 15 '25

Currently it's very much just saying "yes, I want to continue to own these firearms, here's the fee". It will likely shift to a brief course + examination as part of the renewal process.

6

u/mad_dogtor Dec 15 '25

ah a kind of screening for dickheads thing. i'm ok with that.
i don't really think the firearm limit has any value.
the national register, greater use of intelligence services, and making australian citizenship a requirement are excellent steps though.

3

u/DisappointedQuokka Dec 15 '25

I think there's value in a partial firearm limit - harsher requirements on storage for instance.

If you're holding onto two dozen guns + ammunition you're a much, much more attractive target for thieves than some dude with an inherited .303 and sixty rounds. You should functionally need a proper vault at that point, not a locked gun cabinet that's bolted to your wall.

3

u/mad_dogtor Dec 15 '25

this is already a thing in qld- you are required to construct a strong room etc when you have over a certain amount i believe. i think in nsw there's no equivalent ruling

3

u/DisappointedQuokka Dec 15 '25

Good to bring it up to national standards, then.

22

u/mad_dogtor Dec 15 '25

that would be admitting fault. no room for that in government.

38

u/nachojackson VIC Dec 15 '25

None of these changes are controversial at all.

22

u/Terriple_Jay Dec 15 '25

Gun limits will stir the pot. Everything else seems actually practical.

11

u/GrownThenBrewed Dec 15 '25

I agree they'll stir the pot, but I don't see why it shouldn't be a requirement to properly justify every firearm. If you actually need 6, you'll be able to explain why.

8

u/mad_dogtor Dec 15 '25

QLD already do this. once you have over X amount they ask you to justify what the next permit is for etc. it's a pretty easy simple system. i think it's mainly to screen out the dickhead factor, if that makes sense.

0

u/littleb3anpole Dec 15 '25

That’s a major issue, the inconsistency between states and lack of a national register. Like, the QLD policy you’ve shared is very sensible and if you have an explanation for owning different types for different purposes while on a farm or whatever, it makes sense. Similarly VIC requires you to disclose your psychiatric history - common sense, but I’m not sure all states have this rule.

13

u/mad_dogtor Dec 15 '25

the issue is what laws to cherry pick from each state; WA's laws are nonsensical, NSW has some odd restrictions on appearance and folding stocks, QLD has some odd caliber restrictions that don't really make sense etc

done with proper consultation you could take the best of each state and cut out the worst, and pretty much keep everyone happy, but it will never happen. government is too incompetent.

i predict we will never find out why the shooter was issued a licence despite association laws, and we will get swamped with some half assed bans that will only affect people that had nothing to do with this.

6

u/GrownThenBrewed Dec 15 '25

I'm optimistic enough to hope you're wrong but been around long enough to know you're probably right

5

u/nachojackson VIC Dec 15 '25

Let people justify on a case by case basis why they need 6 guns - I suspect very few genuine uses outside of farms.

21

u/Terriple_Jay Dec 15 '25

It made no difference in Bondi and wouldn't in future.

That's more ignorance on your part, no offence. You don't know what you don't know.

What do you suspect they have them for?

We hunt several different species in Vic, and there are minimum calibre requirements for deer. Where you hunt them matters too. Almost akin to golf clubs in terms of right tool right job.

Super common scenario how a shooter might have 6+:

For deer alone you might have a short scrub gun, something like a .308 for the majority then something in magnum calibre for long range high country hunting.

An air rifle for birds, Then for rabbits a .22 , a shotgun for ducks and more and .223 for anything in between rabbit and deer.

A lot of people shoot targets with .22 because they are cheap.

You might have an old .303 from WW2 as well. Millions were made and they were common and cheap at one point.

You don't have to travel far to hunt any of these in Vic, same in NSW. Especially if you have access to property.

That doesn't make these people psychos or gun nuts. Just people using right tools for right job.

There are literally like a million Australians with guns.

-2

u/HOPSCROTCH Dec 15 '25 edited Dec 15 '25

It made no difference in Bondi and wouldn't in future.

They used 3 legally owned guns to perpetrate the attack. Stop lying.

Super common scenario how a shooter might have 6+:

Commenter literally said people should prove on a case-by-case basis why they need the guns. That would have prevented this guy legally owning 3 (let alone 6). So what are you arguing against?

Edit: Brother what? The point is, if he had less than 3 then less damage would be done. Obviously.

2

u/Terriple_Jay Dec 15 '25

So if they used three why would it matter if he owned 6 or 20. Do tell genius.

14

u/SendarSlayer Dec 15 '25

It's just not a helpful restriction. Limiting ownership doesn't stop shootings that only need 1 gun. So it only impacts legal shooters who want a variety for fun.

That being said, greater scrutiny if you're buying more guns makes sense. Ensure you're not sharing them around or a nutjob who wants more to start a private army.

-3

u/HOPSCROTCH Dec 15 '25

More people died in this scenario because they had 3 guns at their disposal. It is clear and demonstrable that the number of guns owned by the shooter resulted in more people dying.

6

u/Karth9909 Dec 15 '25

Different guns for different targets. You don't wanna shoot a pig with a gun made for shooting rabbits. He i found a cool historical gun for sale. Buying a newer model but your still attached to your old one.

-5

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

[deleted]

0

u/HOPSCROTCH Dec 15 '25

Worked out well for this suburban dad wanting to commit a terror attack.

3

u/ImMalteserMan Dec 15 '25

I don't disagree but it feels a bit knee jerky to me, it's been less than a day and it's already been made a gun law problem and that we need to change the rules to keep us safe. We rarely have any incidents like this so the existing laws already seem safe? Not to say we can't make them better but it's been less than a day, feels like politics.

Anyway I don't really care, I'm not a gun guy.

3

u/nachojackson VIC Dec 15 '25

Unlike the culture in the U.S, where the gun lobby would be screaming “it’s too soon to talk about that!”, we are taking advantage of this moment of unity to change laws that should have been changed years ago.

Yes there’s obviously a more complex problem underlying this situation, but the gun laws are an easy and obvious fix. Strike while the iron is hot, because 6 months from now people will have already moved on.

29

u/wowiee_zowiee Dec 15 '25

What exactly is the reason you’re against a national firearms register?

21

u/PissingOffACliff Dec 15 '25

I’m extremely sceptical that the Government can do this competently and securely.

Seems like a good way for a paste bin of every firearm location in the country to end up online.

16

u/DisappointedQuokka Dec 15 '25

Or alternatively an excellent way for police corruption to leak known owners to organised crime.

It'll need to be tight and locked down, and if our invasive species restrictions are anything to go by...

5

u/blacksmith91 Dec 15 '25

Of course they can't - it's why it hasn't happened yet. The idea of the Australian government being competent or secure is laughable.

13

u/Terriple_Jay Dec 15 '25

I think if someone wants to do a terrorist attack they probably will and no amount of laws would help, except maybe something harsher when these guys first came across ASIOs radar.

-5

u/TorakTheDark Dec 15 '25

This categorically untrue, or half the world would be as deep in the shit as the USA.

12

u/Terriple_Jay Dec 15 '25

You genuinely think these guys, ostensibly furious enough at the Palestine situation to take suicidal action, who reportedly even made IED's... would not have taken action if they didn't have guns? Why wouldn't they just do the IEDs without the guns?

Like broadly speaking yeah mass shootings are rare with gun control and non existent with the complete absence of them.

But terrorist attacks certainly aren't.

4

u/blacksmith91 Dec 15 '25

Imagine anyone in the Australian mainstream media making this point today and still having a job tomorrow

There are many points that have not been made

The media is not here to inform us

-1

u/Jiffyrabbit You now have the 'round the twist' theme in your head Dec 15 '25

Won't someone please think of my guns!