SYDNEY, Dec 15: Australia is reeling from one of its deadliest acts of mass violence in decades after a shooting at Sydney’s Bondi Beach claimed 16 lives, raising urgent questions about extremism, public safety, and firearm regulations.
New South Wales (NSW) police confirmed on Monday that 16 people died in the attack on Sunday evening, during a public gathering of nearly 1,000 people celebrating the first day of Hanukkah, the Jewish Festival of Lights. Fourteen victims were killed at the scene, while two succumbed to injuries in hospital. The victims ranged in age from 10 to 87, highlighting the indiscriminate nature of the violence. One of the deceased was also among the alleged shooters.
Another 40 people remained hospitalised, five of them in critical condition.
Details of the attack
NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon said the attackers were a father and son, aged 50 and 24. The older man was shot dead at the scene. Authorities noted that the 50-year-old was a licensed firearm holder who legally owned six guns, a fact under scrutiny as investigators examine how the attack was carried out.
The incident has been formally declared a terrorist attack, though authorities are still investigating the motive. The timing and location, during a religious celebration, have intensified concerns about targeted violence and antisemitism.
National response
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemned the attack as “an act of pure evil, an act of antisemitism, an act of terrorism on our shores in an iconic Australian location.” He vowed that Australia “will not be divided by hate or violence” and pledged solidarity with Jewish Australians. Albanese also reiterated the government’s commitment to tackling antisemitism, describing it as a “scourge” that must be eradicated collectively.
Historical context
The Bondi Beach shooting is the deadliest mass shooting in Australia since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, which killed 35 people and led to sweeping gun law reforms. The fact that one attacker legally owned firearms is expected to reignite debates over licensing, monitoring, and gun control, even as authorities caution against drawing conclusions before the investigation concludes.