Why gun debate has triggered a surprising and fiery political battle in NSW

For most of my life, Australia’s gun laws have been about as close to a settled issue as you could get. Strict gun control laws introduced by John Howard after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre are regularly cited as world-leading gun reforms, and an example of a government which took a principled stance in the face of orchestrated opposition for the public good.

The Australian public, largely, looks at the regular shootings which take place in the US with a sense not just of horror, but bemusement – if only they could follow our lead, goes the thinking. Polling immediately after the Bondi massacre showed massive public support for stronger gun controls.

But the backlash to the gun buyback announced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Premier Chris Minns this week has given a sense that some of that backing may have been eroded in the months since Bondi. It raises an interesting question about whether the Howard-era consensus is being eroded in the post-context, algorithmic age of social media.

The buyback, announced in the context of the Bondi massacre, followed a suite of other gun control measures passed by the Minns government, including a limit on firearms to four for individuals and 10 for primary producers and sporting shooters.

The opposition Liberal Party, which supported the cap when it passed through parliament after the shooting in December, has walked away from its previous bipartisan support for the laws (Coalition partner the Nationals opposed them at the time).

Opposition Leader Kellie Sloane described the buyback as “bullshit” this week and has accused the government of using it as a “smokescreen for their inaction” on broader issues of social cohesion and community safety.

But in a situation like this, it is difficult to differentiate between noise and actual public opinion. How can politicians such as Minns or Sloane really grasp where the public’s mood is at in an environment where it is possible to not only bypass mainstream media sources entirely but to engage singularly with an information ecosystem tailored to and encouraging of your own biases?

It is revealing in that context that Sloane this week chose to comment on a social media post by Chris Katelaris , aka “Big Chocky”, a sort of populist right-wing influencer who opines on issues such as immigration. Though he says he doesn’t endorse any political party, his One Nation content tends to be markedly sympathetic.

Katelaris, who has 620,000 followers on Instagram , criticised the Liberals for voting for the gun cap when it passed through parliament in December, and Sloane replied on Tuesday to explain her volte-face.

“Hey there Chocky – fair cop. But as someone said to me the other day – there’s a reason pencils have erasers,” Sloane, or her staff, wrote in the comments. “My anger about the gun buyback is genuine.