Mass shootings like Port Arthur, Christchurch and Bondi focus nations’ minds on gun control far more than day-in-day-out shootings where one or two typically die. Mass shootings demand political response: something must be done. Thoughts and prayers are never enough. Parliaments rapidly convene and the usual suspects roll out their talk of knee-jerk reactions and of “decent, law-abiding citizens” whose freedoms to own frighteningly lethal weapons must never be impinged. On cue, Nationals like Bridget McKenzie and One Nation’s new recruit Barnaby Joyce didn’t disappoint in the last week, climbing in their tardis and repeating discredited arguments from 30 years ago.

In their world apparently, there are decent law abiding gun owners and those who should never be let near guns. But in ten mass gun homicides at Hoddle St, Melbourne (1987), Canley Vale NSW (1987), Oenpelli Northern Territory (1988), Strathfield (1990), Terrigal (1992), Hillcrest Queensland (1996), Port Arthur (1996), Osmington, Western Australia (2018), Christchurch (2019) and Bondi (2025) all the perpetrators had neither any history of violence nor any documented history of mental illness.

Two of these attracted post hoc descriptions of the shooters being strange or loners, joining millions who might attract such comments. Until they started shooting, all were McKenzie’s  and Joyce’s law abiding citizens.

The new laws will give police greater powers to do background checks on gun licence applicants. One of the Bondi shooters was licensed and had six legal, registered weapons which he shared with his unlicensed son. So will more thorough licence application checks require police to also investigate the backgrounds of all family members too – sons, brothers, fathers, uncles? And what about all associates and friends? Might not someone with an unblemished background easily be a conduit who could pass their legal guns and arsenal of ammunition others?  Clearly all such possibilities are way beyond any realistic chance of being investigated.

But we don’t use the same arguments about any form of policing. Every day a random breath testing unit picks up a few over the limit, many more are driving intoxicated without being caught. It’s the same with speeding. So stop both of these practices because they fail to eliminate all dangerous driving? Really?

Port Arthur saw sweeping reform centred on the outlawing of semi-automatic rifles and pump action shot guns from civilian ownership, gun registration and mandatory locked storage in homes. In the 17 years before Port Arthur, there were 13 mass gun homicides where four or more (not including the killers) died. In the 30 years since, there have been two: a six victim familicide in Western Australia and Bondi.

After I published a report 20 years on from the 1996 reforms, opponents of the changes were arguing that a mass shootings are rare events and that the 20 year absence of  massacres then  might just be a chance occurrence. We calculated the likelihood of this being mere chance was some 200,000 to 1 and that had the trend of mass shootings pre-Port Arthur continued, we would have expected another 16 mass shootings. We had none in 20 years, with just two since.

Bondi revealed that 30 years after the 1996 Port Arthur triggered National Firearms Agreement, a functioning national system of seamless gun registration is still not a reality. The police can get and share instant information on criminal records, vehicle registration and driver licensing. All our medical records are available to any doctor with our consent. The intransigence with gun registration is utterly scandalous.

We can expect the new reforms will reduce the probability of future massacres, but may not eliminate them.  Gun control advocates have long asked governments to require all licensed weapons to be stored in high security community armouries, user paid through gun licensing and registration. This has never been taken up. Maybe next time.