88
Bondi beach terror attack: father and son duo allegedly used licensed firearms in shooting
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2025
88 points (98.9% liked)
World News
51315 readers
2542 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It takes some reflection to ask how, in a country that has banned guns, a shooting spree can happen. All the normal critics who cry for banning guns are quiet because their only solution clearly doesn't fucking work.
Normalize mental health care and broaden access to services, psych eval requirements to be licensed for gun ownership, MEDIA REFORM that make sure language and content are reflective of reality to prevent emotional people making life choices for others.
These are the changes that will fix society and how people are fed information to be tricked into stochastic terror. That pair did not commit this crime in a vacuum. They did this because they were pushed to feel this way by the information they had available.
Are you an anti-vaxxer? Are you against seat belts? Are you against using antiseptics on open wounds? Are you anti condoms? Anti washing your hands? Anti brushing your teeth?
Looking at the Wikipedia page on firearm related homicide rates by country, between 2014-2020 Australia had an average rate of 0.117 gun-related deaths per-100k inhabitants. On the other hand, the USA during that same time period had an average rate of 3.181 gun-related deaths per-100k inhabitants.
When compared, the USA had on average 2715% more gun-related deaths per-capita than Australia between 2014-2020, that's 27x. This should make it obvious that the tighter gun restriction policies of Australia make a significant difference in contrast to the USA's very loose policies around gun ownership, a far cry from "doesn't fucking work".
It worked for like 30 fucking years, dude. How many mass shootings have happened in the US in that time?
Australia has not "banned guns". They have some very strict restrictions on who can own them, but they're absolutely possible to obtain.
Fuck me there's some ignorant people here.
While nothing is going to be an absolute solution to this problem, if you compare Australia and America you'll find that banning guns makes a pretty significant difference.
Unless we can prevent 100% of firearm deaths, we shouldn't take any action /s
Also, what Australia did literally did prevent 100% of mass shootings for 3 decades
Came here to say this.
In response to a mass shooting in 1996 Australia passed strict gun regulations. Since then you can pretty much count the number of mass shootings in that country on one hand.
Compare that to Wikipedias list of mass shootings in the USA for just 2025. I stopped counting that list at 300.
It really doesn't though, Australia had/has a much smaller and more spread out population, plus they have more guns in civ hands now than they did before the ban.
Australia also has a ton of safety nets for the population while the USA keeps removing them forcing people into poverty, and unfortunately poverty comes desperation, which a lot of the time falls into crime.
Even adjusted per capita (Aus population is 8%, or roughly 1/12, of the US), the difference in mass shootings is orders of magnitude.
Australia actually has a much less spread out population - more than 2/3 of our population lives in just five cities across the country (Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth).
That's not what I pointed out at all. I pointed out that the ban didn't do anything. They have more guns now than they did pre ban.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Australia_by_population
You're largest city being Sydney compared to one of our cities like Chicago is nearly twice the population size and is in a smaller footprint. So sure most of your population lives in the cities, so does the USA, but you're still way more spread out, and like I said before you actually have safety nets.
You already had low gun crime before the ban anyways. You're trying to compare apples to oranges here.
This is what it looks like when you start with a conclusion ("gun control cannot work") and go hunting for anything that you can maybe twist into something that appears to support that while ignoring any and all evidence to the contrary.
I picture you reading the headline about this event and getting giddy because now you can finally start talking about how "gun control actually failed in Australia"
Not even close. What I read is that your system failed to stop two terrorists from committing a mass shooting, even though you have some of the strongest gun control in the world.
What that tells me is that guns aren't the issue, the issue is society as a whole. We allowed a genocide of the Palestinian people and now there are people who are using it as a means to retaliate.
Violence is going to happen with or without guns. Mass carnage isn't something new since guns were invented. Humans are violent. The only things we can do to reduce that violence is work on society. The more educated a person is the less likely they're to commit violence. The less a person is in poverty, less likely to commit violence. Just these two things branch into, a lot more solutions to our violence issue than "ban guns".
How many mass shootings has Australia had since 1996?
Way to ignore everything I have posted.
Australia since 1996 has more firearms than before the ban and buy back. Yet has less mass shootings.
So you make that work. More firearms in civ hands than ever, yet less shootings.
Is it the number of guns or some other factor?
"Nobody can ever have guns for any reason" is not what gun control means.
Basically, all you just told me is that their gun control schemes worked. Assuming what you said is even true.
The two of these are not mutually exclusive.
And one isn't even relevant in this case.
The guns were legally obtained, meaning these weren’t “banned guns.”