Smart way to end gun violence

File photo: Michael Walker

File photo: Michael Walker

Published Nov 21, 2014

Share

Gun violence is only a symptom of underlying social injustices, poverty, powerlessness and despair, says Rich Mkhondo.

There are certain subjects – the death penalty, abortion and gun control – that rattle people’s cages. If you speak out on them, you will hear from people who don’t agree with you.

Predictably, the killing of Bafana Bafana captain and Orlando Pirates keeper Senzo Meyiwa has re-energised the debate on gun control.

Indeed, pro- and anti-gun controllers have immersed themselves in emotion and self-righteousness.

After all, while other weapons – knives, meat cleavers, whatever – may be at the disposal of anyone intent on taking another person’s life, guns certainly make it so much easier and quicker.

If events of the last few weeks didn’t impel lawmakers, including our Police Minister Nathi Nhleko and SA Football Association president Danny Jordaan to take serious steps on the gun control front, perhaps nothing would have.

As horrifying and sad as what happened to Meyiwa, it’s the tip of the iceberg in gun violence.

According to figures released by the police, more than 16 000 people were murdered last year.

Gun Free SA claims that about 42 percent of those murders involved guns.

Others use guns in suicides, homicides and unintentional shootings.

One of the things that separates this country from most others is easy access to firearms. It’s that factor that renders possible sickening incidents like Meyiwa’s killing, hence it’s time that thoughtful people acknowledged that this nation’s standing as one of the world’s most violent has to be addressed.

In fact, the tightening of gun laws is long overdue.

As the heroics of Meyiwa fade, gun rights advocates will continue arguing that the problem isn’t the weapons, but the few people misusing them.

I believe we should be aiming to prevent our citizens from becoming involved with violent crime altogether and deal with the ever-increasing scourge of crime.

Before reaching that conclusion, let me look at the arguments by both the pro- and anti-gun control sides.

Supporters of tighter gun control measures argue that the more guns you find, the greater chance they’ll be used in some awful manner.

On its website, Gun Free SA reports: “Gun-related killings are not indiscriminate acts of chance that randomly affect people. There is a simple cause and effect – the presence of a gun puts everyone at risk for injury and death – whether it is used for self-injury such as in suicide, unintentionally in an accident, or in cases of family violence.

“For many South Africans having a gun in the home is about protecting themselves against the stranger intruder, but data both in South Africa and elsewhere shows that you are four times more likely to have a gun used against you than to be able to use it successfully in self-defence.”

In this fire fight, gun owners are armed with reason and the constitutional right to ownership of property. They seek to protect something tangible: the right to bear arms, and with it the ability to defend themselves, if necessary, through their own efforts.

Supporters of gun ownership say guns make them safer. They say as gun ownership rises, violent crime drops.

The more likely that a victim may be armed, the less likely that he/she will be attacked. And when victims are attacked, guns tilt the odds in their favour.

Therefore, they say that if politicians want to impress the populace how concerned they are regarding the illegal use of guns, let them put some teeth into the punishment and not punish law-abiding citizens, who comply with the laws in place.

The anti-gun lobby says too many guns are killing too many people. No other industrialised society tolerates such a situation, even those who value liberty as much as we do.

The anti-gun crowd says it is more than willing to give up its right to bear arms, especially if it can deny that right to everyone else.

Gun-control utopians just want the nasty things to go away. Once law-abiding citizens have surrendered their guns, these wishful thinkers sincerely hope that criminals will be disarmed as well. Hoping tends to be a major element of their public-policy agenda.

They crave new laws and regulations as espoused by our police minister and his policy writers to reduce risk and make us all safer. For them, the promise of safety trumps freedom.

If guns were outlawed tomorrow, thugs would still have their guns. But over time, 20 years maybe, they’d gradually be confiscated, ultimately leading to a gun-free society, where our children and their children will live in safe communities. The alternative to suffering through such a supply dry-up period is to suffer increasingly and perpetually from gun proliferation without let-up.

Which is the greater evil?

The South African Gun Owners Association says: “We must stop blaming instruments of crime. Despite the carnage on our roads no one calls for the banning of vehicles; despite the many drowning of people no one calls for the banning of swimming pools or the sea; and so I could carry on. Criminals will always obtain guns or whatever else to commit their atrocities with, while the disarming of the law-abiding will merely cause them to become easier targets. “

For me, tackling gun crime is a complex, multi-faceted problem that needs addressing in a number of ways, including the old chestnuts of parenting, education and employment.

The major questions are: how do stricter gun laws control address the social and cultural conditions that are at the heart of the myriad problems that contribute to violence in those poor and wealthy neighbourhoods?

Is stricter gun control going to force parents to take responsibility for the care of their children?

Is stricter control of guns going to enlighten those prone to violence to the value of human life?

Will we all start expecting more from human beings, or will we continue to lower our moral, social, professional, and cultural standards? Will stricter gun laws force people to take responsibility for their destinies, or will we continue with this “got a problem; make a law” type of government.

Gun violence is a symptom of underlying social injustices, poverty, powerlessness and despair. We must address the inequities in our society.

Granted, ultimately, a civilised society must have strict gun laws and guidelines of gun usage if it is to have a modicum of domestic tranquillity of the kind enjoyed by relatively crime-free democracies. Given our history of anti-apartheid struggles, lawlessness, proliferation of guns, poverty and helplessness, this will not come easily. It certainly cannot be done radically. It will probably take one, maybe two generations.

Passing laws is a symbolic – purely symbolic – move in that direction. Any real justification should be to reduce crime and desensitise the public to the regulation of weapons.

Would more and stricter gun control laws have an impact? Absolutely – on people who obey laws. But they aren’t the people who shoot people at random during car hijackings and other robberies or invade phone stores in our malls, let alone embark on cash heists.

Those people will get firearms no matter how stiff the laws. They’ll steal or buy them on the streets. Violent criminals will always involve weapons. As long as the law-abiding population and criminal classes doubt that serious crime leads to serious punishment, attempts at serious gun control will be futile.

* Rich Mkhondo runs The Media and Writers Firm (www.mediaandwritersfirm.com), a content development and reputation management agency.

** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.

Pretoria News

Related Topics: