The Bondi Massacre: bungling all round with gun owners (and taxpayers) now set up as scapegoats

Three things stand out in the aftermath of the Bondi massacre. The first is the extent of unfounded fearmongering about licenced firearms. The second has been the approval of yet more firearms restrictions, that are disruptive, very costly and won't work. Finally, there is the ineptitude of almost all key players in the massacre.

Popular perceptions about violent crime in Australia simply do not accord with the real world. Popular belief (promoted by the media and anti-gun activists) attributes a much higher homicide rate to gun violence than is the reality, and the public regularly gets scared witless by TV footage demonstrating certain types of guns being fired rapidly. Many politicians promoting gun control have rarely, if ever, fired a gun.

For the period July 2023 to June 2024, Australia recorded only 31 gun-related murders, a rate of 0.09 per 100,000 people (over 50 times lower than the US). It is further known that only about 9 per cent of firearm-related homicides in Australia involved licensed gun owners. The risk of being murdered by a licensed gun in Australia is therefore insignificant.

In Australia, knives are used far more frequently than guns in homicide incidents. In 2023-24, a knife or other sharp instrument was used in 34 per cent of homicides, while firearms were used in 12 per cent. Since 1990, homicides by firearm have reduced to less than half, yet the Australian population has increased by about 65 per cent and firearms ownership (since 1996) is estimated to have roughly doubled. Authorities should be targeting knife crime and unlicensed guns, not licensed law-abiding gun owners.

No player emerges looking good following the Bondi massacre. ASIO (less than two weeks before) did predict that a terrorist attack from "lone actors or small cells" was "probable". Despite this assessment being passed on to thousands of federal and state officials, no action was taken. ASIO itself, as well as the NSW Police, previously investigated but failed to properly identify the threat posed by the younger gunman.

On the night of the massacre, only three mostly inexperienced general duties police, armed just with pistols, were on duty to protect the crowd of about 1000. They did as well as could be expected under the circumstances. Contrast this with the memorial service exactly a week later, when Bondi was guarded by a heavy police presence, including snipers on rooftops and police boats in the water. Similarly, police armed with rifles attended the test at the SCG. This is all typical of bureaucratic "backside protection". Initial inaction commonly is followed up by futile over-kill (excuse the pun) well after the main need has passed.

Mobile phone footage of the Bondi shootings (with accompanying sound) indicates that 103 gunshots were recorded in the audio in less than six minutes. Some were police fire, so that the two killers fired (at most) a total of about 90 rounds. This equates to about 7 or 8 rounds per minute each (hardly a rapid rate of fire). In total the two gunmen killed 15 people and (partly reflecting the use of shotguns) also wounded about 40. It is likely that the size of the crowd meant that a missed target often resulted in an adjacent person being impacted instead.

Without wishing to be gruesome, the pair were relatively ineffective compared with the toll at Port Arthur, where a single gunman killed 35 people, though they were roughly on a par with the Hoddle St, Queen St, and Strathfield killers. Remember, however, that Bondi had been far more crowded than the other locations.

In 2024 a single person armed with just a knife managed to stab 6 people to death and wound another 12 at Westfield Bondi Junction. Of course, vehicles have also been used even more effectively as weapons. The 2016 Bastille Day massacre in the French city of Nice saw 86 people killed after a man drove a truck into crowds.

The media reported that the Akrams meticulously planned the massacre over months, and practiced on a NSW farm. Given the supposed degree of planning, they would have to be regarded as incompetent. Police allege that the two men started their attack by throwing three pipe bombs and a tennis ball bomb into the crowd. They all failed to detonate. The Akrams then started shooting into the crowd.

The video suggests that the Akrams (even though the father was a gun club member) were mainly self-trained and not good shots. Anyone familiar with shooting a rifle would know that accuracy is greatly increased if the shooter can rest his gun and his body against a solid object. Shooting from a prone or sitting position using a sling to hold the rifle tight is also far more effective than standing and shooting unsupported. Instead, there was little attempt by the Akrams to use the adjacent wall to facilitate a steady aim. Similarly, the shooters' footwork was rushed and unsteady, and totally unsuited to accurate shooting.

The firearms used during the attack are believed to be the Beretta BRX1 .308 straight-pull rifle and the Stoeger M3000 M3K 12-gauge straight-pull shotgun (made by a Beretta subsidiary in Turkey). The former is quite expensive and retails from $2595 to $3199. The standard magazine capacity for the Beretta BRX1 in .308 Winchester in Australia is 5 rounds. A 10-round magazine is also available for purchase for $99. The Stoeger shotguns (regarded as relative "cheapies") can be bought new for $759 to $900 and come with a 7 + 1 round capacity in a tube magazine.

Much has been made of the Akrams' use of a straight pull bolt action. The straight pull action is not a recent innovation and (like the lever action) has been around since the late 19^th century. In trained hands there is no question that the straight pull is faster than traditional bolt actions, though standard bolt actions in the right hands can also be very fast. While there can be an appreciable difference in cycling speed, time getting into position and on target for each shot is more important, as is magazine capacity.

The straight pull has not been very popular amongst the military, even in the days before automatic rifles. The theoretical advantage of faster cycling was offset by the greater complexity of the actions, resulting in reliability issues. Early designs were more sensitive to dirt and grime; a significant drawback compared to the robust Mauser or Lee-Enfield actions of the day. The overall speed advantage turned out to be marginal. While faster, the difference in field performance was generally minimal for the average soldier and well-trained turn-bolt user. Overall, greatly limiting access to straight-pull actions will achieve nothing in terms of public safety.

It is worth pointing out that using multiple removable magazines is an additional way of facilitating rapid fire, though it is unclear whether the Akrams used multiple rifle magazines. Using stripper clips for rapid loading of bolt action military guns can be similarly effective.

For the Akrams, it is likely that their use of high-capacity magazines was more significant than their use of straight pull actions. In relation to shotguns, the Stoeger shotguns might have been relatively quick to fire but the Akrams took a long time to reload the (non-removable) tube magazine each time it became empty. Shotguns also are generally only lethal to humans over relatively short distances, so that their decision to use this type of weapon was almost certainly a poor choice.

The "lone wolf" aspect of the massacre is underlined by the fact that the Akrams came from Sydney's west, which is "headquarters" for Sydney's gangsters. Had they been well connected, the Akrams would have been able to get their hands on (illegal) semi-automatics and handguns.

The NSW government (with indecent haste and minimal consultation) has passed sweeping ill-considered "reforms" tightening gun laws. The laws enacted suggest that those drafting them had little appreciation of the practicalities of shooting. Drafted in response to the shooting, the bill passed the state's upper house in the early hours of Christmas Eve following a marathon debate. It split the Coalition, with the Liberals joining the Labor government to pass it, while the Nationals opposed it. The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers also voted against it, while the Greens (who support heavy restrictions on guns but oppose restrictions on protests) abstained.

The new Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 (NSW) made a lot of changes to gun laws. Almost any equipment used by the Bondi killers has been moved to a very restricted firearms category, and most licence holders are now restricted to owing only four firearms (10 for farmers). In addition, licence holders must now be a member of a gun club, unless exempted. Even farmers are wondering if this will apply to them.

One gets the impression that the Minns Government deliberately set out to be seen to be doing something. They also sought the title of having the most restrictive gun laws in Australia (now beating WA), and to drive down gun ownership by harassing licensed shooters with red tape.

I supported the restrictions that the Howard Government placed on centre-fire semi-automatic rifles. In the hands of most shooters, they are no more than "ammunition wasters" and restrictions made (rare) mass slaughters even more difficult. The other Howard era restrictions, I regard as no more than costly nuisance regulations:

· Longarms do not lend themselves to being easily used in crime. They are generally too difficult to conceal. Even if stolen, they continue to be overwhelmingly used for hunting and recreation.

· A small minority of gun owners never declared their ownership of assault and semi-automatic rifles. Only law-abiding shooters did. The result is that the vast majority who did the right thing were easily disarmed by the state, while the others still covertly own now restricted firearms.

· Post-Howard, gun bureaucracy made a lot of law-abiding shooters feel treated like criminals. Many now regard gun registries as insufferable bureaucracies that aways place the letter of regulations above common sense.

· Once, when I sold one of my farms, I advised authorities of the change of address. They nevertheless still sent my licence renewal to my former address so that I overlooked renewal. The result was that one day I was telephoned by the NSW Police demanding that I surrender all my firearms because I had become unlicensed. I was required to apply for a new licence from scratch. It took nearly four months and several hundred dollars in storage costs before I got my firearms back. This was all despite officialdom being substantially at fault.

· Howard era restrictions on shotguns, which until Bondi had not featured in massacres, went too far. Pump action shotguns with five round capacity (technically the best multi-shot non-automatic shotguns) should have been less severely curtailed. Their banning for most shooters merely led to inferior actions (lever action, straight pull) of similar magazine capacity being bought instead. Regulators must have been watching too many Hollywood movies.

It is difficult to see what a cap on the number of weapons an individual can own is going to achieve. A terrorist was never going to walk down the road with half a dozen rifles and shotguns under each arm. One well-chosen weapon with sufficient ammunition is the obvious option, as during war. The cap will prove extremely costly but achieve nothing. Families may get round the cap to some degree by registering guns to more than one family member.

The Howard Government's mandatory gun buyback programme removed and destroyed more than 650,000 firearms. The buyback cost $304 million in compensation and $63 million in administration. The Government increased the Medicare levy from 1.5% to 1.7% of income for one year to finance the 1996 programme. In addition, thousands of guns were simply surrendered under amnesty. Huge waste occurred through the destruction of guns of significant second-hand value (many subsequently replaced by other permitted models), and from police time wasted in undue monitoring of "safe storage".

Prime Minister Albanese announced another national buyback scheme just before Christmas, which may see a much bigger buyback than under Howard. The states and territories will be responsible for collecting, processing and paying individuals, with the Australian Federal Police responsible for destruction. The cost of the scheme will be shared on a 50-50 basis with the States. One estimate puts the likely cost at $15 billion, though that figure seems excessive. It is only taxpayers' money anyway so what matter!

Much of the shooting fraternity is livid at not only what has been done but also because of its apparent futility, undue haste and lack of consultation. Our police forces are already short-staffed, and it is doubtful that they have the resources to enforce all the new regulations without compromising other duties.

Many people in major cities fail to realise is that there is no Opera House, musical theatre, or major arts centre in country towns. At best there are pubs and clubs. On the other hand, fishing and shooting are huge recreations in country areas, with almost all larger towns having a gun club. Clay pigeon and target shooting are very popular and have contributed to Australia's Olympic successes. Shooting is Australia's sixth most successful Summer Olympic and Paralympic sport.

The need to control feral animal numbers is also not sufficiently appreciated by city folk. In Canberra there are organised annual protests by animal activists against government kangaroo culls, despite the only real alternative being a continuing horrendous and cruel slaughter on the roads. Activists also alternate between advocating that farmers (for environmental reasons) graze kangaroos instead of cattle and sheep to effectively promoting the opposite. Activists have successfully campaigned to have kangaroo products (mainly meat and leather) banned in many overseas markets.

Specialist firearms are needed for particular tasks, analogous to anglers' need for different types of fishing rods. Anglers have specialist rods for fly fishing, beach fishing, spinning, deep sea fishing, boat fishing etc. Similarly, rimfire guns (.17, .22, .22 WRM etc) are used for short-range shooting of small animals, .17 Remington (or similar) for long distance fox shooting, shotguns for birds and clay pigeon shooting, .222 to about .270 for medium sized animals, carbines for scrub shooting, and large calibres for long distance deer, buffalo and other large animals. Larger calibres are also better in windy conditions over long distances. In addition, specialist guns are used in target competitions (and competitors may need to own several).

A lot of antique and historic army guns have been handed down or collected. It would be a shame for such heritage to be destroyed for no good reason other than an arbitrary cap on the number of guns an individual can own.

People also forget that a lot of farms are owned by persons resident in cities and towns. A lot of city dwellers also have strong links to the country. Four in ten NSW firearms licence holders live in major cities, with a further four in ten living in inner regional areas.

The kneejerk reaction of "progressive" politicians to any perceived problem is to pass yet more freedom-limiting laws that never work. The Albanese, WA, and NSW Labor governments have recently proven true-to-type. They have set up licensed gun owners as scapegoats to any gun violence but continue to ignore issues of immigration, criminal gangs, and religious extremism. Labor also panders to the "nervous-Nellie" mentality which has been around since the emergence of COVID.

Some problems are incapable of resolution. It is not possible to pick all potential home grown or Islamic killers or those with emerging mental conditions. Similarly, with lone actor attacks, there's often no sign beforehand of the potential for violence.

There is also the double standard.

Around 1,200 people are killed each year on Australia's roads and about 40,000 are seriously injured, yet nobody seriously suggests restricting car ownership. Similarly, there is no call to ban kitchen knives (nor should there be), which feature in homicides more commonly than guns. In 2017, a mentally ill man attempted to murder five students with a baseball bat at the Australian National University. (Sensibly) nobody called for a ban on baseball or cricket bats.

One of the effects of Albanese's rise to power has been a switch from the Coalition's soft support for Israel to overt hostility from Labor. This has changed the political atmosphere and provided licence to an explosion of anti-Jew rhetoric from elements within the Islamic community and elsewhere. Labor shows no appetite to check this. While Israeli over-reach in Gaza has further inflamed feelings, (minority held) extreme Islamicist views well preceded the recent conflict.

A backlash to the new gun laws is already in evidence, especially in country areas. Already there has been a further shift in support away from the Coalition to One Nation. The Liberal brand in NSW has become ever more closely linked with wokism, while Labor is increasingly being recognised as chasing the Islamic vote and deserting its working-class roots.

In the face of widespread calls for an independent Royal Commission into the Bondi massacre, PM Albanese has announced a snap reviewof federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies to be led by respected former defence and ASIO chief, Dennis Richardson. The "closed door" review will assess whether commonwealth agencies have adequate powers, structures, processes, and information-sharing arrangements.

The review has been criticised for being too narrow in its terms of reference and for the choice of a former career bureaucrat (associated with the existing security apparatus, and formerly chief of staff to Bob Hawke) to head it. The review is also too federally focussed and does not cover the issue of whether the actions (or lack thereof) of the Albanese or Minns governments contributed to anti-Jew intimidation and violence. It also won't address most of the issues I have raised about whether the new laws will meaningfully facilitate reducing gun violence.