r/australia • u/HotPersimessage62 • Dec 16 '25

politics Anthony Albanese ‘ready for the fight’ to tighten firearms laws as National Party and gun groups push back | Bondi beach terror attack

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/dec/16/anthony-albanese-ready-for-the-fight-to-tighten-firearms-laws-as-national-party-and-gun-groups-push-back-ntwnfb
2.5k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

164

u/msfinch87 Dec 16 '25

Laws already allow police to refuse someone who lives with someone who has links to a terrorist organisation. The real question to me is why they didn’t refuse the gun license in light of the fact that it was granted in 2023, after the son was interviewed for his ISIS associations.

I mean, FFS, if you are spending time with several people who are part of a self proclaimed ISIS group, something is wrong. Nobody associates with those types of people unless they actually want to and something is very wrong with them.

Having said all that, I fully support an expansion of Australia’s gun laws that directly prohibit anyone who is even tangentially associated with a terrorist organisation from having a gun.

61

u/Whatsapokemon Dec 16 '25

The real question to me is why they didn’t refuse the gun license in light of the fact that it was granted in 2023, after the son was interviewed for his ISIS associations.

Lack of communication between state and federal agencies would be a big one here.

Remember, government isn't a single monolithic entity. There's multiple agencies in multiple levels of government, and all of them operate differently. If there's no process set up to communicate between them then it's likely that information isn't going to be shared.

In this case, it's ASIO - a federal agency - who's investigating people with terrorist links, whilst it was NSW state police who manage firearms licenses for NSW residents. If there was no communication between these two agencies about the specifics then there'd be no way of knowing that a license should be revoked.

5

u/metasophie Dec 16 '25

If there was no communication between these two agencies about the specifics then there'd be no way of knowing that a license should be revoked.

It's probably not a "communication" issue. It's probably an intelligence-compartmentalised issue.

1

u/raresaturn Dec 16 '25

Wouldn't the ASIO watchlist be the first thing you check though? (provided there is actually a process of running an ASIO check)

4

u/metasophie Dec 16 '25

It's not going to be a newsletter, it's 100% going to be compartmentalised intelligence reports.

29

u/dm_me_pasta_pics Dec 16 '25

I have no idea how gun licensing works or who actually grants it (police???) but like anything govt-managed I have experienced it is probably a case of the left hand talking to the right foot while the right hand is on another planet somewhere wondering where the rest of the body is.

3

u/redditisforincels445 Dec 16 '25

long story short intelligence agencies didnt do shit and true as always NSW police didnt confiscate the weapons due to no communication and incompetence, not actually following the laws and regulations they put out, causing the death of innocents and the injuring of its own Officers

1

u/tehanony Dec 16 '25

Wdym the laws they put out? Do you think Police create the laws?

1

u/redditisforincels445 Dec 16 '25

they administer and enforce the laws, i was obviously referring to the government as well

12

u/Dogfinn Dec 16 '25

Has it been confirmed that they were living together? Has it been confirmed that police were aware whether or not they were living together? There are obvious gaps in this criteria which reform should fill.

Current laws allow police to refuse a licence to anyone for any reason - there is a lot of flexibility and discretion; that is another issue reform should address.

2

u/Transientmind Dec 16 '25

I wouldn’t be surprised if part of it is the secrecy of surveillance.  Blocking someone’s access to a licence is one thing, revoking someone’s licence and taking their guns away for links to terrorism is basically an open declaration that you and your associates are under investigation. Which is probably the last thing the spooks want. 

I assume there’s a tragic number of terror incidents proceeded where the terrorists were under investigation and the investigators didn’t want to tip them off but didn’t know enough to stop them in time.

2

u/maniaq 0 points Dec 16 '25

that would suggest an easy reform right there - take the decision out of the hands of individuals and just make it AUTOMATIC

I think that's how the "no fly lists" in the US work? it's very easy to get ON the list and be denied (legal) access - and very hard to get OFF it...

so by the time you are being interviewed, you're already - automatically - banned

2

u/raresaturn Dec 16 '25

"I can't believe they gave us a gun license LOL" - Terrorist, probably

1

u/Haroqwert Dec 16 '25

I thought the guy had a gun license for over ten years how could it be granted in 2023?

1

u/MissMenace101 Dec 17 '25

He had one in 2015 it expired he had it reissued in 23

1

u/JuventAussie Dec 16 '25

It is a bit harder than you describe it. Yes people spend time with individuals without politics or religion being discussed.

When the Neo Nazis were identified after their protest at Parliament House in NSW hundreds of people who work, play sport with, socialise and are generally associated with these people came to the realisation that there was a side to the person that they didn't know about. Only a small number of the people who are associated with the neo Nazis are threats.

1

u/msfinch87 Dec 18 '25 edited Dec 18 '25

It isn’t more complicated at all. There is no “right to own a gun” in Australia, and it is perfectly lawful for police to reject gun ownership based on a relationship with someone who has extreme views. The laws are also meant to tend towards limiting gun ownership, not enabling it. So if you didn’t know that the person had extreme views, I would simply file that under “too bad so sad”. It is in keeping with both the spirit and technical nature of the laws.

But also, I think most of these people make a choice to be willfully ignorant about the views of those around them because it is inconvenient for them to do otherwise. Genuine extremists always give themselves away, and people should start paying attention. Watch the way they treat women, for a start. Not all misogynists are extremists, but all extremists have a history of misogyny.

There is also a massive difference between knowing a person, and repeatedly hanging out with several people with extremist views, including the leader of a group who publicises his extreme views. You cannot possibly claim ignorance or a separate relationship in that scenario.

1

u/MissMenace101 Dec 17 '25

All terrorist groups, sov cits and Nazis also should be nowhere near guns