Firearm laws don’t prevent terrorism 

And four rules to remember after the act 

By Tim Bannister 

Rule 1: The perpetrators are always the ones responsible for their murderous actions. 

Rule 2: Rarely does the event happen in isolation. There is almost always a trail of historical indicators leading up to the event and a series of officials’ mistakes and maladministration. 

Rule 3: The officials will always seek to cover up their mistakes as governments attempt to introduce new laws that are a display to the public that ‘they are taking urgent action’. 

Rule 4: Kneejerk reactions always end up with poor public policy decisions and unintended consequences. 

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Not since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 have we seen a more disingenuous, untruthful and dishonest display from government during a national crisis. State Labor Governments closed gun stores, told the media that shooters were hoarding firearms and ammunition, and they feared chaos on the streets. None of it was true and it put on display how dishonest and uninformed a government can be. And now after the December 2025 Bondi terrorist attack on Australian Jews by antisemitic Islamic extremists, the answer is to change the firearms laws? Even former Prime Minister John Howard, who declared after the 1996 gun buyback that ‘he hated guns’, couldn’t bring himself to agree that we needed further firearm laws. He could see that it was being used as a distraction, rather than agreeing to holding a Royal Commission to publicly examine the government’s and other’s actions leading up to the crime. 

Anyone with the faintest knowledge of firearms licensing knows it is prosperous that the father of his ASIO-investigated son could hold a firearms license. The two perpetrators were fuelled by xenophobic hatred and religious extremism – the same extremism that has seen box cutters, firebombs, rental vans, knives and improvised explosive devices used in terrorist attacks around the world. The tools they used are more often than not irrelevant and rarely happen in a vacuum. 

While keeping in mind Rule 1, the perpetrators are always the ones responsible for their murderous actions, it is on the governments of the day to do what they can to ensure public displays of extreme hatred and, in this case, antisemitism, is not tolerated, as it lays down the permission for further violence. Hate speech leads to hateful acts, usually violent in nature. Think of the pro-Palestinian rallies outside the Sydney Opera House after the atrocities of October 7, 2023, where 1,219 people were killed, mainly young Israelis attending a music festival in their homeland. Or the young male neo-Nazis marching in our cities under the auspices of being proud Australians, too stupid to realise their grandfathers or even great grandfathers went to war against the Nazis and all they stood for. The fact that governments allowed these displays of public hatred is astonishing and their urgency to blame the tools the terrorists used to divert attention away from their own failings is repugnant. We deserve better both as Australian citizens and legitimate, legal firearm owners. 

Prime Minister Albanese and NSW Premier Minns have shown us their true colours and antipathy towards us. Terrorist acts and the fear of terrorism since the Twin Tower attacks by Al Qaeda on September 11, 2001 in New York have been used as an excuse to try and limit private firearm ownership across the world, including in Australia. I and others could see the ramifications of terrorism on our freedoms being challenged at the United Nations and domestic levels and it is the reason I chose and was supported by the then-SSAA leadership to study Counter Terrorism at university. 

I studied at various Australian universities including Monash, Murdoch, Macquarie, Curtin and qualified from Griffith University based in Queensland. I was invited to undertake a doctorate in Counter Terrorism, which I politely declined, as I had already spent the equivalent of five years at university, two of them working fulltime and the idea of studying for another five years while my wife and I juggling a young son, working fulltime and flying to Canberra a dozen times a year and occasionally to the United Nations in New York was not appealing. But the studies helped me understand the legal manoeuvrings of governments and how to best keep our sport and recreation safe from their meddling. 

The lone wolf anti-Islamic attack in Christchurch, New Zealand, the murderous religious zealots in Wieambilla and now the lone wolf and dad terrorist attacks at Bondi Beach have all given rise to restrictions on us, the citizens and legal firearm owners. Diminishing of our Western democratic freedoms are exactly what the terrorists want. The reality that governments find it permissible to reduce their citizens’ freedoms for short-term political convenience is disgusting and must be fought. 

NSW Labor jumped at the chance to change firearm laws, and their counterparts, the NSW Liberals, were only too quick to say: ‘me too’. Federally, the Opposition Liberals and particularly the Nationals have spoken out against the need to change firearm laws and have instead insisted the government call a Royal Commission. Federal Labor politician and Olympic pistol shooter Dan Repacholi, who sponsors myself to lobby in Federal Parliament, has also spoken out about the futility of increasing firearms laws to prevent a future terrorist attack. 

“My position is clear. Australia has strong gun laws and they save lives, but I do not support changes that unfairly target responsible, law-abiding firearm owners. Measures that are blunt, symbolic or simply designed to appease public anger without improving safety are not the answer,” Dan said. 

In Queensland, Premier Crisafulli has been cautious about endorsing any future changes to firearm laws and said they will be considered in a “proper and considered way”. NSW on the other hand recalled its state parliament prior to the Christmas break and rushed in numerous laws including banning ‘belt-fed’ firearms. They literally banned a ‘unicorn’ firearm that doesn’t exist. Someone advising the NSW Labor Government so misunderstands the technology behind the firearms used in the Bondi terrorist attack, they banned a make-believe rifle. Did they confuse a waist belt that holds ammunition, a bandoleer with a Rats of Tobruk style belt-fed machine gun? Either way, it demonstrates the ludicrous behaviour of that states’ politicians and its advisors. 

I wonder what the Australian Jewish community would say about restricting civilian firearm ownership? No one, it seems, has actually asked them. In Israel, it is common for the government to advise its citizens to self-arm in public should there be intelligence that an attack at a shopping centre, for instance, was imminent. As one restrained Palestinian terrorist said after being shot by a civilian at a mall in Israel while being treated by an ambulance officer, “No one told me they had guns too!”