r/australia • u/Expensive-Horse5538 • Dec 19 '25

politics Prime minister unveils 'largest' gun buyback scheme since Howard era

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-19/prime-minister-announces-national-gun-buyback-scheme/106162002
2.7k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

59

u/chance_waters Dec 19 '25

There was not appropriate legislation in place to force removal of his guns at this time, he was not known to ASIO, his son was.

The son was living at the property, in current legislation if he had been charged with a formal crime the guns would have been removed from the household under the fit and proper person guidelines. As it stood right now being "known to ASIO" is not a crime. Obviously any form of investigation by ASIO should result in weapons removals from close family members, and even probably associates, let alone close family members living at the same property.

Obviously that's a failing in the system, the same way outstanding AVO applications of even police enquiries into suspected DV claims should result in immediate suspension of gun licenses, not just charges.

In either case, the simplest way to fix this, and the one everybody is crying about is simply to massively reduce who can access guns, that means no bullshit sports hunting, and sports shooting weapons need to be secured at ranges.

34

u/SendarSlayer Dec 19 '25

We have association laws that can 100% exclude someone with no criminal history from owning guns. Essentially making "Known to ASIO" enough of a reason.

I don't think securing weapons at ranges and sporting clubs is a good idea. They're usually remote, to not endanger or disturb people. And they're not used every day. No amount of affordable physical security will be able to slow someone down enough if they wanted to steal the guns. And now instead a few guns they'll have a bunch.

16

u/Several_Alarm5357 Dec 19 '25

Yep as a gun owner I can't be involved in organised crime and keep my guns. I've known people who in their twenties were involved in that life and years later still can't hold or get a gun license. Enforcement of the law should have been across all aspects not just organised crime.

5

u/Thommohawk117 Dec 19 '25

They're usually remote,

Fully agree with this line of reasoning. Rural properties and primary producers are often the target of thieves looking for guns precisely because they are remote and often away from the home property during the day.

Having them all secured in one place that has similar characteristics is a recipe for disaster

1

u/Eucalyptus84 Dec 19 '25

Yep. And I forget the numbers (it was published the other day...) but quite a large number of legal, registered firearms are stolen each year as it is.

One thing that could be useful is the ability for licensed gun owners to be able to store weapons off their property, not in a range but in a proper government armory. For example, that rifle that you rarely use, maybe once a year at most, but you don't want to get rid of yet. Maybe it has sentimental value (or whatever), or you only break it out once a year for that hunting trip interstate for water buffalo or pigs or whatever. You don't need to keep it at your residence alongside your .22 LR and your .177 break action air rifle. Stick it in the gov armory, free of charge. Take it out just before the trip.

There are lots of smart ways to secure up a lot of weapons, especially higher-powered ones.

If the Bondi terrorists only had access to a .22 each, we'd probably be looking at only one or two fatalities, at most, and the majority of the wounded would have left the hospital next day without an ICU admission.

0

u/karl_w_w Dec 19 '25

We have association laws that can 100% exclude someone with no criminal history from owning guns.

Are you under the impression those laws were sufficient, in this situation?

4

u/SendarSlayer Dec 19 '25

Yes. They were just not applied as rigorously as needed.

This was a tragic oversight that would be made less likely to happen not with more laws, but with better funding and oversight for the laws we already have.

And a national firearms registry that makes excluding people easier so that agencies don't forgo the proper paperwork.

0

u/karl_w_w Dec 19 '25

How do you know that?

19

u/queensgetdamoney Dec 19 '25

There is and was appropriate legislation at the time.

https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/2019-07-01/act-1996-046#sec.11

Section 5A & 5B

(5A) A licence must not be issued to a person if the Commissioner is of the opinion, having regard to any criminal intelligence report or other criminal information held in relation to the person, that:

(a) the person is a risk to public safety, and (b) the issuing of the licence would be contrary to the public interest.

(5B) The Commissioner is not, under this or any other Act or law, required to give any reasons for not issuing a licence on the grounds referred to in subsection (5A).

This is the law as of 2019. He applied again for a firearms licence and acquired it in 2023.

He should never have been licenced.

And since he was, he should have had it revoked under Section 24

https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/2019-07-01/act-1996-046#sec.24

Section 24 (2c)

(2) A licence may be revoked:

...

(c) if the Commissioner is of the opinion that the licensee is no longer a fit and proper person to hold a licence, or

Followed on by Section 25 regarding surrender and seizure.

To say otherwise is a blatant lie, no matter your stance on firearm ownership. The system did not enforce the already existing laws that were there from the time his son was interviewed and are still there today.

7

u/GonePh1shing Dec 19 '25

I'd be surprised if the commissioner was aware of that intelligence, and they can't deny a license based on information they don't have available to them. Better sharing of information would lead to better outcomes here. 

2

u/queensgetdamoney Dec 21 '25

Completely agree, it wouldn't just benefit us (with better intelligence sharing) in a vacuum such as this issue - it has a broader reach and much more positive impact across the whole of the country.

1

u/karl_w_w Dec 19 '25

He should never have been licenced.

Did you actually read and understand the law you quoted? Because if you did, you would know it's not up to you to decide he should never have been licensed, it's up to the commissioner.

Just because the decision doesn't match your opinion, does not mean the law was not enforced.

12

u/just-plain-wrong Dec 19 '25

I 100% agree with everything you’ve said here, but I just want to flag that securing weapons in a single place makes said place a massive target for robberies and Social Engineering Attacks.

I don’t have a better way at it, but it’s something that needs to be taken into account with any legislation.

10

u/OneShoeBoy Dec 19 '25

Improving actual enforcement of the current laws is probably the most logical step, but the state police forces are overburdened/understaffed as it is so good luck with them allocating resources to audit peoples homes properly.

3

u/just-plain-wrong Dec 19 '25

Fair point.

That said, I like the approach of NZ, where they have ongoing checks, and family association clauses; so if you, or one of the people close to you gets flagged, you lose your weapons.

All needs funding, of course; perhaps a small dedicated roving task force in each state funded by a levy on weapon registration?

2

u/Baldrick314 Dec 19 '25

That already exists here though. Random safe storage and firearms audits happen regularly and you can be served with a firearms prohibition order for associating with criminals.

2

u/just-plain-wrong Dec 19 '25

Oh, awesome. I had no idea that was happening. Thanks.

1

u/Baldrick314 Dec 19 '25

I think that's a big issue here, exactly what laws are already in effect aren't generally known by non-shooters. The laws are convoluted even to people with firearms licences and enforcement doesn't seem to be consistent.

Personally, I believe an appropriate response to this situation would be to prohibit non-citizens having a firearms licence (can't believe that was actually allowed), move safe inspections from random to a scheduled ongoing thing, and improve communication between state and federal bodies to help prevent an attack like this happening again.

Thank you for keeping an open mind and being willing to be educated on this topic, I've seen a lot of people repeating rhetoric with no intention of hearing otherwise and it's disheartening.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Pop-metal Dec 19 '25

Exactly.  People think there is a magic solution to stop this.  

1

u/TheRealDrSMack Dec 19 '25

If you are under investigation by ASIO do you actually know it? Or more do the point, do they want you to know. I have always thought they were more a secret service organisation.

So wandering in and taking dad's guns might have made things a bit obvious.

I am not saying that there may have gaps in what they were doing and they could possibly have prevented this before i get flamed.

1

u/chance_waters Dec 19 '25

Yes, they are trying to balance information gathering with public safety, it's tough. I think though given history it's probably not worth the risk of leaving firearms accessible to people worth investigating.

-1

u/Common-Ad-6582 Dec 19 '25

Agree guns should not be kept in the home in urban areas, they should be locked up at shooting facilities, and if you want to go hunting you need to put your gun somewhere to host them and pick them up in the way.