News
Australia announces strict new gun laws. Here’s how it can act so swiftly
Mourners gather at the Bondi Pavilion as people pay tribute to the victims of a mass shooting at Bondi Beach.
Izhar Khan/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Izhar Khan/Getty Images
At least 15 people were killed at a beach in Sydney, Australia, on Sunday when a father and son opened fire on a crowd celebrating the beginning of Hanukkah. At least 42 people were hospitalized.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese described the shooting as a “terrorist incident” targeting Jewish Australians.

Mass shootings are rare in Australia, which has historically strict gun laws. But Sunday’s deadly massacre has prompted Albanese and other Australian officials to revisit those laws and call for further restrictions to prevent more mass shootings in the future.
Here’s what Australian officials are proposing, and why the country’s politics and culture might allow for it.
Australia already has strict gun laws
The origin of Australia’s notoriously strict gun laws dates back to 1996, when a gunman killed 35 people in an attack in Tasmania.
The April 28 mass shooting came to be known as the Port Arthur massacre, and almost immediately the bloodshed prompted Australia’s political leaders to unite behind an effort to tighten the country’s gun laws. That effort was led by conservative prime minister John Howard.
The result was the National Firearms Agreement, which restricted the sale of semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns and established a national buyback program that resulted in the surrender of more than 650,000 guns, according to the National Museum of Australia. Importantly, it also unified Australia’s previously disjointed firearms laws — which had differed among the states and territories before 1996 — into a national scheme, according to the museum.
Guns handed into Victoria Police in Australia in 2017 as part of a round of weapons amnesty.
Robert Cianflone/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Robert Cianflone/Getty Images
The agreement has been cited internationally, including by the likes of former President Barack Obama, as a model for greater gun control and is credited with dramatically reducing firearms deaths in Australia. The country had zero mass shootings in the more than two decades that followed the agreement, one paper found.
Albanese said in a press conference Monday that the “Howard government’s gun laws have made an enormous difference in Australia and are a proud moment of reform, quite rightly, achieved across the parliament with bipartisan support.”
But Australian firearm ownership has been on the rise again in recent years. The public policy research group The Australia Institute wrote in a January report that there were more than 4 million guns in the country, which is 25% higher than the number of firearms there in 1996. Certain provisions of the National Firearms Agreement have been inconsistently implemented and in some cases “watered down,” the group said.
Graham Park, president of Shooters Union Australia, told supporters in a member update over the summer that Australian firearms owners are “actually winning,” The Guardian reported.
What the proposed gun measures will do
The prime minister and regional Australian leaders agreed in a meeting on Monday to work toward even stronger gun measures in response to Sunday’s shooting. Here’s what they include:
- Renegotiate the National Firearms Agreement, which was enacted in 1996 and established Australia’s restrictive gun laws.
- Speed up the establishment of the National Firearms Register, an idea devised by the National Cabinet in 2023 to create a countrywide database of firearms owners and licenses.
- Use more “criminal intelligence” in the firearms licensing process.
- Limit the number of guns one person can own.
- Limit the types of guns and modifications that are legal.
- Only Australian citizens can hold a firearms license.
- Introduce further customs restrictions on guns and related equipment. The Australian government could limit imports of items involving 3D printing or accessories that hold large amounts of ammunition.
Albanese and the regional leaders also reaffirmed their commitment to Australia’s national firearms amnesty program, which lets people turn in unregistered firearms without legal penalties.
While not specifically referenced by the National Cabinet, some of the proposals address details related to Sunday’s shooting.
Australia’s prime minister, Anthony Albanese, (left) at Parliament House with AFP Acting Deputy Commissioner for National Security Nigel Ryan speak after the Bondi Beach shooting.
Hilary Wardhaugh/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Hilary Wardhaugh/Getty Images
Albanese said Monday the son came to the attention of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation in 2019. ABC Australia reported that he was examined for his close ties to an Islamic State terrorism cell based in Sydney.
Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke said the son is an Australian-born citizen. Burke added that the father arrived in Australia on a student visa in 1998, which was transferred to a partner visa in 2001. He was most recently on a “resident return” visa.
How Australia’s political system enables swift legal changes
Part of the reason Australia’s government can act so quickly on political matters of national importance is because of something called the National Cabinet.
The National Cabinet is composed of the prime minister and the premiers and chief ministers of Australia’s six states and two territories.
It was first established in early 2020 as a way for Australia to coordinate its national response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since then, the group has convened to discuss a number of national issues, from a rise in antisemitic hate crimes to proposed age restrictions on social media use.
The National Cabinet doesn’t make laws, but its members attempt to agree on a set of strategies or priorities and work with their respective parliaments to put them into practice.
Australians wanted stronger gun laws even before Sunday
Gun control efforts in Australia inevitably draw comparisons to the U.S., where the Second Amendment dominates any discussion about firearms restrictions.
John Howard, the prime minister during the Port Arthur massacre, said in a 2016 interview with ABC Australia that observing American culture led him to conclude that “the ready availability of guns inevitably led to massacres.” He added: “It just seemed that at some point Australia ought to try and do something so as not to go down the American path.”

In fact, the National Firearms Agreement avows that gun ownership and use is “a privilege that is conditional on the overriding need to ensure public safety.”
Robust gun laws remain popular among Australians today. A January poll by The Australia Institute found that 64% of Australians think the country’s gun laws should be strengthened, while just 6% believe they should be rolled back. That is in a country where compulsory voting means that politics “generally gravitates to the centre inhibiting the trend towards polarisation and grievance politics so powerfully evident in other parts of the globe,” Monash University politics professor Paul Strangio wrote last year.
Now, there are renewed calls to further harden Australia’s gun laws in the wake of Sunday’s deadly shooting.

“After Port Arthur, Australia made a collective commitment to put community safety first, and that commitment remains as important today as ever,” Walter Mikac said in a statement on Monday.
Mikac is founding patron of the Alannah & Madeline Foundation, which is named for his two daughters who were killed in the 1996 shooting. His wife, Nanette, was also killed.
“This is a horrific reminder of the need to stay vigilant against violence, and of the importance of ensuring our gun laws continue to protect the safety of all Australians,” Mikac added.
News
National Park Service will void passes with stickers over Trump’s face
The Interior Department’s new “America the Beautiful” annual pass for U.S. national parks.
Department of Interior
hide caption
toggle caption
Department of Interior
The National Park Service has updated its policy to discourage visitors from defacing a picture of President Trump on this year’s pass.
The use of an image of Trump on the 2026 pass — rather than the usual picture of nature — has sparked a backlash, sticker protests, and a lawsuit from a conservation group.
The $80 annual America the Beautiful pass gives visitors access to more than 2,000 federal recreation sites. Since 2004, the pass has typically showcased sweeping landscapes or iconic wildlife, selected through a public photo contest. Past winners have featured places like Arches National Park in Utah and images of bison roaming the plains.

Instead, of a picture of nature, this year’s design shows side-by-side portraits of Presidents George Washington and Trump. The new design has drawn criticism from parkgoers and ignited a wave of “do-it-yourself” resistance.
Photos circulating online show that many national park cardholders have covered the image of Trump’s face with stickers of wildlife, landscapes, and yellow smiley faces, while some have completely blocked out the whole card. The backlash has also inspired a growing sticker campaign.
Jenny McCarty, a longtime park volunteer and graphic designer, began selling custom stickers meant to fit directly over Trump’s face — with 100% of proceeds going to conservation nonprofits. “We made our first donation of $16,000 in December,” McCarty said. “The power of community is incredible.”
McCarty says the sticker movement is less about politics and more about preserving the neutrality of public lands. “The Interior’s new guidance only shows they continue to disregard how strongly people feel about keeping politics out of national parks,” she said.
The National Park Service card policy was updated this week to say that passes may no longer be valid if they’ve been “defaced or altered.” The change, which was revealed in an internal email to National Park Service staff obtained by SFGATE, comes just as the sticker movement has gained traction across social media.
In a statement to NPR, the Interior Department said there was no new policy. Interagency passes have always been void if altered, as stated on the card itself. The agency said the recent update was meant to clarify that rule and help staff deal with confusion from visitors.
The Park Service has long said passes can be voided if the signature strip is altered, but the updated guidance now explicitly includes stickers or markings on the front of the card.
It will be left to the discretion of park service officials to determine whether a pass has been “defaced” or not. The update means park officials now have the leeway to reject a pass if a sticker leaves behind residue, even if the image underneath is intact.
In December, conservation group the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C., opposing the new pass design.

The group argues that the image violates a federal requirement that the annual America the Beautiful pass display a winning photograph from a national parks photo contest. The 2026 winning image was a picture of Glacier National Park.
“This is part of a larger pattern of Trump branding government materials with his name and image,” Kierán Suckling, the executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, told NPR. “But this kind of cartoonish authoritarianism won’t fly in the United States.”
The lawsuit asks a federal court to pull the current pass design and replace it with the original contest winner — the Glacier National Park image. It also seeks to block the government from featuring a president’s face on future passes.
The America the Beautiful National Parks Annual Pass for 2025, showing one of the natural images which used to adorn the pass. Its picture, of a Roseate Spoonbill taken at Everglades National Park, was taken by Michael Zheng.
Department of Interior
hide caption
toggle caption
Department of Interior
Not everyone sees a problem with the new design. Vince Vanata, the GOP chairman of Park County, Wyoming, told the Cowboy State Daily that Trump detractors should “suck it up” and accept the park passes, saying they are a fitting tribute to America’s 250th birthday this July 4.
“The 250th anniversary of our country only comes once. This pass is showing the first president of the United States and the current president of the United States,” Vanata said.
But for many longtime visitors, the backlash goes beyond design.

Erin Quinn Gery, who buys an annual pass each year, compared the image to “a mug shot slapped onto natural beauty.”
She also likened the decision to self-glorification: “It’s akin to throwing yourself a parade or putting yourself on currency,” she said. “Let someone else tell you you’re great — or worth celebrating and commemorating.”
When asked if she plans to remove her protest sticker, Gery replied: “I’ll take the sticker off my pass after Trump takes his name off the Kennedy Center.”
News
Federal immigration agents shoot 2 people in Portland, Oregon, police say
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Federal immigration officers shot and wounded two people in a vehicle outside a hospital in Portland, Oregon, on Thursday, a day after an officer shot and killed a driver in Minnesota, authorities said.
The Department of Homeland Security described the vehicle’s passenger as “a Venezuelan illegal alien affiliated with the transnational Tren de Aragua prostitution ring” who had been involved in a recent shooting in Portland. When agents identified themselves to the vehicle occupants Thursday afternoon, the driver tried to run them over, the department said in a written statement.
“Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired a defensive shot,” the statement said. “The driver drove off with the passenger, fleeing the scene.”
There was no immediate independent corroboration of those events or of any gang affiliation of the vehicle’s occupants. During prior shootings involving agents involved in President Donald Trump’s surge of immigration enforcement in U.S. cities, including Wednesday’s shooting by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis, video evidence cast doubt on the administration’s initial descriptions of what prompted the shootings.
READ MORE: What we know so far about the ICE shooting in Minneapolis
According to the the Portland Police bureau, officers initially responded to a report of a shooting near a hospital at about 2:18 p.m.
A few minutes later, police received information that a man who had been shot was asking for help in a residential area a couple of miles away. Officers then responded there and found the two people with apparent gunshot wounds. Officers determined they were injured in the shooting with federal agents, police said.
Their conditions were not immediately known. Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney said during a Portland city council meeting that Thursday’s shooting took place in the eastern part of the city and that two Portlanders were wounded.
“As far as we know both of these individuals are still alive and we are hoping for more positive updates throughout the afternoon,” she said.
The shooting escalates tensions in an city that has long had a contentious relationship with President Donald Trump, including Trump’s recent, failed effort to deploy National Guard troops in the city.
Portland police secured both the scene of the shooting and the area where the wounded people were found pending investigation.
“We are still in the early stages of this incident,” said Chief Bob Day. “We understand the heightened emotion and tension many are feeling in the wake of the shooting in Minneapolis, but I am asking the community to remain calm as we work to learn more.”
Portland Mayor Keith Wilson and the city council called on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to end all operations in Oregon’s largest city until a full investigation is completed.
“We stand united as elected officials in saying that we cannot sit by while constitutional protections erode and bloodshed mounts,” a joint statement said. “Portland is not a ‘training ground’ for militarized agents, and the ‘full force’ threatened by the administration has deadly consequences.”
The city officials said “federal militarization undermines effective, community‑based public safety, and it runs counter to the values that define our region. We’ll use every legal and legislative tool available to protect our residents’ civil and human rights.”
They urged residents to show up with “calm and purpose during this difficult time.”
“We respond with clarity, unity, and a commitment to justice,” the statement said. “We must stand together to protect Portland.”
U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, urged any protesters to remain peaceful.
“Trump wants to generate riots,” he said in a post on the X social media platform. “Don’t take the bait.”
A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.
Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.
News
Video: What Trump Told Us About the ICE Shooting
new video loaded: What Trump Told Us About the ICE Shooting
By Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Alexandra Ostasiewicz, Nikolay Nikolov and Coleman Lowndes
January 8, 2026
-
Detroit, MI6 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology3 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health5 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Iowa3 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska2 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Nebraska3 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Entertainment2 days agoSpotify digs in on podcasts with new Hollywood studios