-
Chesters supported the bill, citing the high number of registered firearms in Australia and the need to prevent access by those who do not require them. Chesters acknowledged that regional gun owners are generally responsible but argued that the sheer volume of weapons poses a risk to community safety. Chesters referenced public demand for strict gun laws following the Bondi tragedy.
-
Littleproud opposed the bill, characterising it as a political diversion from the issue of radical Islamist extremism. Littleproud argued that the existing licensing system had failed to act on intelligence regarding the attackers, rather than the laws themselves being inadequate. Littleproud warned that the bill would negatively impact sporting shooters and primary producers by restricting imports and imposing burdensome buyback requirements without addressing the root cause of the violence.
-
Hogan criticised the government for prioritising gun law changes over a royal commission into antisemitism and extremism. Hogan argued that the legislation unfairly targeted lawful gun owners and small businesses, who would suffer financial losses without adequate compensation. Hogan stated that the coalition would move amendments to ensure fair compensation for individuals and businesses affected by the buyback scheme.
-
Thompson opposed the bill, describing it as a kneejerk reaction that failed to address the ideology behind the Bondi attack. Thompson argued that the legislation was rushed, poorly consulted, and lacked the support of state governments, risking implementation failure. Thompson emphasised that violent Islamist extremism, not firearms, was the cause of the deaths and called for more targeted measures against hate and radicalisation.
-
Willcox argued that Australia already has strict gun laws and that the bill would punish law-abiding owners while failing to stop terrorists. Willcox explained the legitimate need for various firearms in pest control and sporting activities, asserting that criminals would not participate in a buyback. Willcox stated that the government should focus on addressing radical Islam rather than restricting lawful firearm use.
-
Chester opposed the bill, claiming it was a political solution designed to distract from the government's failure to address radical Islamic extremism. Chester argued that the legislation would divide the nation and cause grief to lawful owners who would be forced to surrender personal or heirloom firearms. Chester stated that the buyback would not enhance community safety as criminals would not return their weapons.
-
Sharkie criticised the rushed parliamentary process and lack of consultation, arguing that the bill was contemptuous of lawmakers and the public. Sharkie cited concerns from constituents, including retired police officers and competitive shooters, who felt the measures were reckless and would unfairly punish compliant citizens. Sharkie highlighted issues with AI-assisted decision-making and the lack of guarantees for fair compensation.
-
Chaffey opposed the bill, noting the anger among regional Australians who rely on firearms for pest control and land management. Chaffey argued that the legislation lacked detail on the buyback scheme's operation and cost, and that it proceeded without adequate democratic scrutiny. Chaffey called for full market value compensation for firearms, accessories, and business losses if a buyback were to proceed.
-
Landry argued that the bill exploited the Bondi tragedy to punish responsible gun owners rather than addressing intelligence failures and radical extremism. Landry stated that the government had shifted blame onto lawful citizens instead of examining coordination breakdowns within security agencies. Landry pledged to stand with farmers and sporting shooters who comply with existing laws.
-
Batt opposed the bill, asserting that the real issue was radical Islam, not gun ownership. Batt highlighted concerns from legitimate businesses that could collapse due to the new restrictions and noted the lack of legislative guarantees for fair compensation. Batt argued that the buyback framework was incomplete and would not prevent terrorism while unfairly impacting lawful owners.
-
Gee stated he could not support the bill, viewing it as a political response that avoided the scrutiny of a royal commission. Gee supported the integration of Commonwealth intelligence into licensing but opposed the buyback scheme due to flawed compensation arrangements for businesses and individuals. Gee argued that the legislation unfairly targeted law-abiding gun owners without addressing the root causes of the attack.
-
Pasin opposed the bill, arguing that Australia does not have a gun problem but rather an issue with radical Islamic extremism. Pasin stated that the legislation was an attempt to distract from leadership failures in addressing antisemitism and that the terrorists used multiple methods, including explosives. Pasin urged the government to stop gaslighting lawful gun owners.
-
Wilson argued that law-abiding gun owners were being scapegoated and that the high number of firearms in his electorate had not led to terrorist attacks. Wilson expressed disappointment that the bill would criminalise activities such as wearing shooting vests and reloading ammunition. Wilson strongly opposed the legislation, citing the traumatic nature of previous buyback schemes for lawful owners.
-
Price opposed the bill, saying it penalised compliant residents without tackling the underlying drivers of radicalisation. Price contended that the measure did not meet the Prime Minister's pledge of a John Howard-style buyback because it omitted assurances regarding equitable market prices and compensation for enterprises. Price characterised the legislation as a political manoeuvre that disadvantaged regional Western Australia.
-
Steggall supported the bill, arguing that current gun laws had eroded and that a national digital register was urgently needed. Steggall highlighted concerns about the number of firearms in urban areas and the risks posed by domestic violence and online radicalisation. While she commended the government's action, she urged further reforms to ensure background checks properly assessed safety risks.
-
Aldred opposed the legislation, stating that it punished responsible gun owners, sporting shooters, and farmers. Aldred argued that the bill was poorly drafted and failed to address the real issues facing the country, such as extremism and security failures.