Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL APPROACHES TO FIREARMS POLICING
South Africa is a developing country and can benefit from the best practices in the policing of firearms, from other countries. Despite demographic differences, the policing of firearms is also an aspect that can be developed by learning from best practices in other countries.
Policing of firearms internationally
The United Nations Economic and Social Council Commission on crime prevention held in Vienna in 1997 indicated that Australia, Canada and New Zealand placed restrictions on civilian ownership of all types of handguns. This helped those countries to reduce the level of handgun ownership, which is reported to be far below that of South Africa. Incidentally, their firearm-related crimes were also reduced decimally (Gamba, 2000:38). Stell (2004, 39) also emphasises the fact that countries with strict gun policies like Hungary, Denmark, Austria, Norway and France have a much lower gun crime prevalence. South Africa’s firearm ownership is comparable to industrialised countries like Costa Rica, Spain and Greece and has fewer firearms than Australia, Canada and Sweden (Gamba, 2000:38).
Amnesty International (2005, 17) reports that secure storage conditions can reduce gun incidences in family violence cases. They indicate that countries like Australia, Canada, Japan and the UK require gun owners to store guns securely and to keep the ammunition in a separate place. In Belarus, guns must be kept disassembled, unloaded in locked boxes away from ammunition. Anti-gun lobbies even called for a total ban on keeping guns in private homes and restrict them to authorised gun clubs or police stations from where their owners could pick them up whenever they need to hunt or do sporting. Puryear (2008) supplies the following overview of gun storage options: A trigger lock device prevents the gun from being fired by a small child who picks it up. It can take the form of a plastic and metal lock that fits around the trigger to prevent it from being pulled, padlock that locks the action, or an open or a cable lock that does the same thing. Trigger locks may be to the disadvantage of the owner if he needs to use the firearm in an emergency as it takes time to unlock it and the trigger lock may cause excessive wear on the spring due to spring loaded squeeze pressure; Dismantled or broken down storage prevents the gun from being fired until it is assembled. This option may be viable for minor children and people who do not know much about firearms. However, thieves may steal a disassembled gun and assemble it elsewhere at their own convenience; Small safes can be hidden for extra security, but thieves are likely to take the entire safe during break ins and break it open elsewhere at their convenience; Large safes are the most secure way to store guns due to their special features to stop common burglaries and are fire-resistant (Puryear, 2008)
According to Columbia Encyclopaedia (2004), the United States of America (USA) is among the few countries where “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” is guaranteed by the constitution. The document indicates that through the years, states within USA tried to enforce stricter gun laws, but in 2002 the Justice Department, under Attorney General John Ashcroft, indicated that it interpreted the amendment to be supporting the rights of individuals to possess and bear firearms. On the other hand, the rights of individuals also need to be exercised taking the safety of the wider community into account.
The July 2012 Colorado, USA incident where a medical student used an automatic rifle to shoot at a cinema audience, killing 12 people and fatally injuring more than 50 others, increased calls for stricter measures in controlling firearms (Pretoria News, 2012:1). Public safety should have been considered above the applicant’s needs when such a firearm calibre was considered. Harries (2012) reports that Holmes legally bought four guns, including a semi-automatic assault rifle, more than 6,000 rounds of ammunition as well as head-to-toe bullet proof protection. Holmes’s character was also questionable, despite being raised in a stable middle class family. It is alleged that a year prior to the incident he tried to rent an apartment from one Aurora building manager, but was turned down despite good references and a clean criminal record, because of his suspicious appearance. A few months before the incident, a local shooting range owner where Holmes was a member overheard a vicious violent voice message on Holmes’s phone but all that did not trigger suspicions of the planned massacre (Harries, 2012).
A USA survey on firearms in late 2012 indicated that 85 percent of the public favours background checks for private and gun show sales, 80 percent support preventing those with mental illnesses from purchasing a gun, 67 percent support a federal database that tracks gun sales and 58 percent are in favour of a ban on semi-automatic weapons (City Press, 2013:26). Despite the shock waves sent out by the shooting, there is little sign of political debate over the American gun law that is deemed to be too relaxed. Harries (2012) believes that gun control has grown even more lax since the 1999 Columbine school shooting in Denver which is just a few miles from Aurora.
The President of the USA, Barack Obama and his Republican challenger Mitt Romney, whose party base is opposed to gun control legislation have been reluctant to mention any support for tightening gun laws in their campaign speeches on the shooting tragedy (Harries, 2012). This silence led to the leading anti-gun campaigner Tom Mauser, whose 15 year old son died in the Columbine school shooting, to declare that America was simply bowing to the gun lobbyists. Some analysts believe that the silence of Barack Obama and the Republican Mitt Romney are simply political and none of them is prepared to make a statement that may jeopardise their political campaigns and chances of their presidential election. That, to some extent, demonstrates the political currents which underpin policies of governments, of which firearm legislation is one.
Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard urged US President Barack Obama to take the gun control campaign to the people, as Australia did in their gun reform (Australia gun laws …, 2012). Howard wrote in the New York Times after the US massacre that “I knew that I had to use the authority of my office to curb the possession and use of the type of weapon that killed 35 innocent people and I knew it wouldn’t be easy”. Howard pointed out that he felt it was unfair to penalise decent, law-abiding citizens, because of the criminal behaviour of others, but as head of state he felt there was no alternative. This was after Australia’s worst massacre in which Martin Bryant, a psychologically disturbed man shot and killed 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania. Studies showed a marked drop in gun-related homicides which went down by 59 percent and a 69 percent drop in gun-related suicides in the 10 years after the weapon crackdown. However, Howard’s positive move cost his political party almost one million votes in the ballot box and they narrowly avoided defeat.
An overview of international practices on firearms
In 1983, New Zealand passed legislation which did away with the registration of sporting guns which comprise 97 percent of privately held guns (Mistry, Minnaar, Redpath, & Dhlamini. 2002:55). They registered the remaining three percent of handguns, which led to the reduction of crime with registered firearms, but which led to an increase in crime with unregistered ones. They moved back to register all firearms and introduced a renewal system where the police posted letters to the firearm owner at the expiry of the licence; failure of which led to the cancellation of the licence after six months. According to Mistry et al. (2002:56), that led to a drastic reduction in firearm-related crimes.
Canada had a dysfunctional firearm registry system and invested billion dollars to upgrade its data base and processes (Quigley, 2003:3). Just like New Zealand, Canada did not register rifles and shotguns and that led to a shift in crime to unlicensed firearm usage, as well as domestic homicides, suicides and accidents. Some of the new processes include firearm registry online, which facilitated the re-licensing of all firearms. Other developments in USA involve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) which requires the Attorney General to secure relevant government records that may render a person eligible to be issued with a firearm licence and feed it to FBI administered NICS, so that federally licenced gun dealers can process a background check on the system to determine a customer’s eligibility to possess a firearm before processing a transaction (Parnell, 2009:47). In essence that led to the reduction of firearm incidents.
Great Britain is one of the most developed counties in the world, but they are also cautious with strict gun laws in respect of who possesses firearms and for what reasons. Britain is also reported to have reduced firearm-related incidents by tightening control over ‘who must bear arms’. A person wishing to possess a firearm in Britain must, according to English and Card (2007:761), be 18 years or older, provide information of previous convictions other than minor traffic offences, names and addresses of two persons who have agreed to act as references to the chief officer of police in the area where he/she resides. English and Card indicate further that information provided by the firearm applicant must be verified by each of the two referees through a signed statement. Once all is in place, the chief officer of police will satisfy himself that the applicant is fit, proper, not a prohibited person, evaluate the reasons provided for the firearm and ascertain that the applicant does, in all circumstances, not pose a danger to the public safety and peace (English & Card, 2007:761).
The following presents a summary of Britain’s requirements for firearm certificates according to Saunsbury and Doherty (2011:34):
• The firearm application process is handled by the police in Great Britain;
• Applicants obtain forms from the local police or internet, complete them and submit them to the police in the area where the applicant resides;
• People with more than one address need to apply using the address where they will be storing the firearm;
• A fee is payable when the application is submitted and refunded if the application is refused;
• There must be two referees who need to confirm the information provided by the applicant ;
• Applicants should submit four photographs that must also be endorsed by the referees as the applicant’s current likeliness, namely the way he/she looks at the time of the application;
• Immediate family members, serving police officials and firearm dealers cannot be used as referees;
• Referees must be residents of Great Britain and should have known the applicant for at least two years and be of good character;
• Applicants applying for target shooting must have an official from such shooting clubs where they are members as referees;
• Providing false information on the application form and failure to disclose previous convictions, no matter how trivial, will result in the refusal of the application;
• A separate motivation for the need of each firearm must be provided;
• Access to storage facilities is a requirement and such facilities must be inspected by a police official.
In addition to the above, firearm certificates in Great Britain may, according to Saunsbury and Doherty (2011:58), be refused if they have reason to believe that the applicant is of intemperate habits or unsound mind, pose a danger to public safety and peace, is prohibited by the Great Britain Firearms Act of 1968 from possessing a firearm and if the applicant does not have proper reasons to possess such a firearm. Warlow (2005:43) also emphasises the strict control measures in Great Britain. He reports that good reasons for firearm acquisition includes membership of a recognised shooting club with a range safety certificate, allowing the particular type of firearm and calibre, and authorisation for use of such rifle for sporting purposes must be accompanied by written permission from the landowner of the suitable grounds. The above measures have reportedly resulted in the reduction of violent and firearm-related incidents.
Parnell, (2009:40) and Johnson et al., (2012:464) indicate that under the USA Federal Firearm Regulation, which includes the National Firearm Act of 1934, the Arms Control Act of 1968 and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, there are nine classes of persons prohibited from possessing firearms. They are classified as follows: Persons convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; fugitives from justice; drug users or addicts; persons with adjudicated mental defectives or committed to mental institutions; unauthorized immigrants and most non-immigrant visitors; persons dishonestly discharged from armed forces; U.S citizenship denunciates; persons under court-order restraints related to harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner; and persons convicted of misdemeanour or domestic violence. Robin (1991:12) argues that the so-called risk group still manages to buy guns from dealers as a result of poor enforcement and ineffective mechanisms to detect their ineligibility prior to sale. Cochrane (2013) indicates that in one county, officials say they have granted gun permits to at least three people whose visual impairments are such that they cannot legally drive. Soon after that, a blind man from New Jersey won his legal battle to keep and shoot guns which were confiscated by police after he accidentally shot himself in the leg. To make matters worse, in Michigan, blind people are permitted to hunt in the company of a sighted partner. In South Africa, the current FCA makes provision for firearm background checks and proficiency testing which involves practical shooting prior to approval of firearm licences.
Being mentally defective or being incompetent with regards to the possession of firearms was described by the US senate Judiciary Committee to include a ruling by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease is a danger to himself or others, or lacks the mental capacity to manage his own affairs. The senator also indicated that the stipulations include a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case and those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lacking mental responsibility (Parnell, 2009:49). A leading New York forensic psychiatrist, Dr Michael Stone, was quoted in The New York Times, highlighting the fact that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violent crime and those who are suicidal have a much higher success rate when a gun is involved. Dr Stone indicated that states are not much concerned with protecting people against themselves, but focus mostly on protecting society against them (City Press, 2013:16). In 2012, the USA President, Mr Barack Obama, tasked USA Vice President Joe Biden, to lead a task team that would look into security issues, including school security and mental health after a mentally disturbed person killed his mother and 20 school children using a licenced military style assault rifle (…gun control, 2012).
Firearm purchases in the United States of America are controlled mainly by the National Instant Check System (NICS) (Johnson et al., 2012:465). Johnson et al. indicate that the firearm purchaser fills in a form which carries a penalty of up to ten years if false information is provided, and submits it to the firearm dealer with a photo ID. The dealer submits the purchaser’s information to the NICS telephonically or online, where after the buyer is screened against the national database. If the buyer is approved, the dealer receives a purchase authorisation number which is endorsed on the application form to verify compliance. Buyers not approved by the system may request a written explanation and if necessary supply additional or the latest information to correct any errors on the NICS database. Common mistakes on the NICS database include, inter alia, non-capturing of overturned convictions by the appeal body.
