Has Australia only seen 2 mass shootings in the last 30 years? How do the statistics compare with the US assuming the same definition of 4 or more shot?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Available reporting shows Australia has had very few large public mass shootings since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, but the statement “only two mass shootings in the last 30 years” is not supported as a blanket fact in the sources; multiple timelines and databases cited by news outlets list several incidents post-1996 depending on the definition used [1] [2]. By contrast, U.S. tallies using broad definitions (four or more people shot) produce hundreds annually; one U.S. tracker counted 391 mass shootings in 2025 as of Dec. 14 [3] and Gun Violence Archive–style counts are far higher than the Australian counts cited by local researchers [3] [4].
1. What “two mass shootings” claim leaves out — definitions matter
Counting mass shootings is highly sensitive to the metric: some lists require four or more people shot, others require four or more killed, some exclude domestic or gang-related incidents and include or exclude the shooter among casualties [2]. Australian timelines compiled by AP, PBS and academic sources show multiple deadly incidents after Port Arthur — including family murder-suicides and other public attacks — and note that counts vary by inclusion criteria [1] [5] [2]. Sources therefore warn that a simple “two in 30 years” claim omits the definitional disputes that drive very different totals [2].
2. What Australian reporting actually records since Port Arthur
Major news timelines and public-health reviews describe Port Arthur as the watershed and then list several post‑1996 incidents: the 2002 Monash University killings, a 2014 family murder‑suicide, the 2018 Wieambilla shootout and the 2022 Queensland extremist shootout among others; AP notes there were 11 mass shootings in the decade before Port Arthur, and that mass shootings have been rare since the 1996 reforms [1] [5] [6]. Academic and advocacy figures cite periods — for example, “no mass shooting with five or more fatalities in the 22 years after the reforms” — but they use narrower fatality thresholds that exclude many incidents counted by broader U.S. trackers [7].
3. How U.S. statistics diverge when using the same broad definition
When a broad definition is applied — for instance, the Gun Violence Archive’s approach of four or more people shot — the U.S. records hundreds of incidents per year; Forbes and others cite 391 verified mass shootings in the U.S. in 2025 as of Dec. 14 [3] [8]. Several sources underscore that U.S. per‑capita gun homicide and mass‑shooting rates are far higher than Australia’s: reports cite gun homicide rates dozens of times greater in the U.S. than in Australia [8] [9].
4. Population and context: apples vs. oranges if you don’t normalize
Commentators note the simple raw-count comparison ignores population differences — roughly 342 million in the U.S. versus about 27–28 million in Australia — which magnifies absolute disparities [4]. Sources advise comparing rates (per capita or per 100,000 people) and clarifying whether counts include shootings with four or more shot versus four or more killed, and whether domestic/gang incidents are excluded [4] [2].
5. What reputable Australian sources say about policy effects and rarity
Australian researchers and advocacy groups argue the 1996 National Firearms Agreement and buybacks drastically reduced mass‑casualty shootings and overall gun deaths; studies and public health accounts report big falls in gun homicides and long stretches with few high‑fatality public attacks, conclusions that rely on the specific definitions used in those studies [10] [7]. At the same time, journalists and academics caution that no policy entirely eliminates mass attacks and that increases in licensed firearms or failures in licensing assessment are now part of the policy debate after the Bondi attack [11] [12].
6. How to interpret the claim and what evidence is missing
Available sources do not endorse the absolute statement “Australia has only seen 2 mass shootings in the last 30 years” without specifying the counting rules; instead they show multiple post‑1996 incidents are recorded in various lists and databases and that scholars explicitly warn definitions change the counts [1] [2] [7]. For a direct apples‑to‑apples comparison you must choose one definition (e.g., four or more shot, exclude gang/ domestic incidents, include or exclude shooter) and then apply the same standard to both countries using a consistent database such as the Gun Violence Archive or an academic global mass‑shooting dataset [3] [13].
Bottom line: Australia’s rate of large public mass shootings is far lower than the U.S. on the metrics most scholars and public‑health sources use, but the precise “two in 30 years” figure cannot be treated as authoritative without the exact definition and dataset; U.S. counts under broad definitions run into the hundreds per year [3] [2] [8].