Review of Firearms Control in New Zealand
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Review of Firearms Control in New Zealand Report of an Independent Inquiry Commissioned by the Minister of Police June 1997 ISBN 0-477-01796-7 Ó 1997 Printed by GP Print, Wellington LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Friday, 20 June 1997 The Honourable J R Elder Minister of Police Parliament Buildings WELLINGTON Dear Minister On 22 August 1996 you appointed me to conduct “an Independent Review of Firearms Control”, on terms of reference then defined, and to report back by 28 February 1997. That reporting date was later extended to 30 June 1997. There has been widespread public interest in the Review. For that reason I submit, together with the Review you requested, a summary of its principal findings and recommendations which I am hopeful the Government will be willing to make available to interested persons without charge. Yours sincerely T M Thorp CONTENTS Abbreviations Acknowledgments 1. Introduction 1.1 Origins and Terms of Reference of Review 1 1.2 Procedure Adopted 3 1.3 Significance of Weak Information Base 5 1.4 Form of Report 7 1.5 Police Use of Firearms 8 2. Uses and Control of Firearms in New Zealand 2.1 The First 120 Years 9 2.2 How We Got The Present System: The Origins and Nature of the 1983 Act and the 1992 Amendment 13 2.3 The Number of Firearms 23 2.4 The Number of Shooters 34 2.5 Firearms Organisations 37 2.6 Types of Use 40 2.7 Attitudes to Firearms and Firearms Control 43 3. The Misuse of Firearms in New Zealand 3.1 Criminal Misuse 55 3.1.1 Introduction 55 3.1.2 Overall levels of crime¾and violent crime 57 3.1.3 Levels of firearm crime 60 3.1.4 Mass killings 66 3.1.5 Firearms and family violence 69 3.2 Suicide 72 3.3 Accidental Death and Injury 76 3.4 Conclusions 81 4. The Purpose and Principles of Firearms Legislation and “The Firearms Debate” 4.1 The Purpose of Firearms Legislation 87 4.2 Conventional Methods of Control, and Their Inter-Relationship 88 4.3 The Arguments Against Further Controls¾ “The Gun Debate” 90 4.4 Recent Movements in Overseas Opinion 105 5. The Effectiveness of the Present System of Firearms Control 5.1 Strengths of the Present System 113 5.2 Weaknesses of the Present System 117 5.2.1 Absence of control over firearms, as distinct from shooters 117 5.2.2 Ten-year licences 117 5.2.3 The competition of arms business with all other police business 120 5.2.4 Complexity and awkwardness of the arms code 121 5.3 Viability of the Present System 121 5.4 Effect and Costs of the Enhancements Proposed in the May 1996 Review 122 6. Improving the Present System¾Options for Reform 6.1 Limiting the Availability of Firearms for Misuse 128 6.1.1 Restricting the availability of high-risk firearms 128 6.1.2 Recovering surplus guns 145 6.1.3 Improved security 148 6.1.4 Ensuring the suitability of firearms licensees 154 6.1.5 Reducing the risk of misuse by the mentally disordered 165 6.2 Promoting Responsible Attitudes to Gun Use and Ownership 175 6.2.1 Combined registration and licensing system 175 6.2.2 Training of shooters 189 6.2.3 Sanctions for the misuse of firearms 191 6.2.4 Media portrayal of firearm violence 194 6.2.5 Clear and comprehensible law 195 6.3 Additional Proposed Reforms 196 6.3.1 Airguns 196 6.3.2 Controls on imitation firearms 201 6.3.3 Controls on the sale of ammunition 204 6.3.4 Limiting the size of collections 205 6.3.5 Amendments proposed by NZ Customs Service 208 6.3.6 Importation of undesirable weapons 212 6.3.7 Communication with the public, and the use of technology 214 6.3.8 Miscellaneous police recommendations 217 6.4 The Administration of Firearms Control 219 7. The Way Forward 231 8. Conclusions 237 Appendices 1. Recommendations 238 2. Importation of Firearms, 1880-1996 248 3. Principal Firearms Incidents 250 4. APMC Resolution, 11 April 1997 254 5. Discussion Paper: Structural Options for Reform of Firearms Administration 256 6. Incidence of Firearms and Firearms Users in New Zealand 269 7. Draft Security Conditions: for Settlement by an Expert Committee 274 8. List of the Principal Persons and Organisations who Assisted the Review 277 ABBREVIATIONS APMC Australasian Police Ministers’ Council COLFO Council of Licensed Firearms Owners DAO District Arms Office or District Arms Officer DOC Department of Conservation IPRU Injury Prevention Research Unit MHC Mental Health Commission MSSA Military style semi-automatic NZMSC New Zealand Mountain Safety Council NZPA New Zealand Pistol Association PCA Police Complaints Authority PNHQ Police National Headquarters SLR Self-loading rifle SSAA Sporting Shooters Association of Australia SSANZ Sporting Shooters Association of New Zealand Inc ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a considerable debt of gratitude to all members of the small team which was assembled in Auckland to gather and analyse the available information on firearms controls. Special thanks are due to Simon Mount, who accepted the position of Research Counsel. His broad and persistent intelligence provided invaluable support to all of us. Others who played essential parts were Jane Beasley and Claire Campbell as research assistants; Alison Cleal, Melissa Geary, Prue Meister, Kathy Mitchell and Penny Shelton as secretaries and word processors; Kate Stone as editor and Katrina Duncan as typesetter. I must also acknowledge the assistance provided by Police National Headquarters, and in particular by Superintendent Lindsay Hunter, who accepted appointment as Police Liaison Officer to the Review, and by the people who worked most directly with him in obtaining and supplying information to it, Tracey Anderson, Clare Aubrey and Mary Schollum and also by Inspector John Coote and Mr Doug Agnew of the Firearms Section. Many others made contributions to the work of the Review. The names and positions of most are set out in appendix 8. Their willingness to assist must speak both to the extent of interest in arms control generally, and to the desire of so many shooters that their commitment to safe firearm use should not be overlooked. To all my thanks. 1 Introduction 1.1 Origins and Terms of Reference of Review In July 1996 the then Minister of Police requested that I undertake an independent review of firearms control in New Zealand. The immediate catalysts for that request were two recommendations made by the Police Complaints Authority following police shootings in September and November 1995 in Invercargill and Whangarei. In its March 1996 report on the Gellatly incident at Invercargill, the Authority recommended:1 [T]hat there be instituted as soon as possible a complete review of the statutory regulations and police guidelines on the control and storage of guns, ammunition, weapons and explosives, particularly in places to which the public have access. A little over a month later the Authority reported on the Radcliffe incident at Whangarei.2 In the intervening period since the Gellatly Report a tragedy of considerable magnitude had occurred in Dunblane, Scotland. The Authority drew attention to the fact that the United Kingdom Government had appointed Lord Cullen to carry out an Inquiry into the shootings in Dunblane, and recommended: [T]hat the Minister of Police secure Government’s agreement to establish an independent inquiry of firearms control in New Zealand. This is intended to replace and widen the Gellatly recommendation. This recommendation would enable a 1 Review of Firearms Control in New Zealand complete review to be conducted of all existing legislation and that public hearings be held so that all persons and organisations with an interest in gun control could make their submissions. It is a matter for Government how it sets the exact terms of reference for such an inquiry and other related issues such as reporting times but I envisage by this recommendation no aspect of gun availability and control be excluded.3 The police response was to conduct its own internal review. On 28 May 1996 the Police Executive Conference at Police National Headquarters approved a report entitled A Review of Firearms Control in New Zealand.4 While stating that it “should not be considered an in-depth study of the issues” the report’s opening paragraph declared that “New Zealand has in place an effective system of firearms licensing and arms control”, and suggested a series of relatively minor reforms “to ensure the system maintains its high level of integrity”.5 Having considered that report, the Minister decided to seek an independent review, and on 22 August 1996 published its terms of reference as follows: REPORT TO THE MINISTER OF POLICE ON AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF ISSUES RELATING TO FIREARMS CONTROL IN NEW ZEALAND TERMS OF REFERENCE 1. To consider the effectiveness of the Arms Act, and its subsequent amendments to control the use of firearms in New Zealand, and to report on, in particular: a) whether the 1992 Amendment has met with general compliance by the public; b) whether the Police have been able to adequately enforce compliance; 2. Arising from consideration of the issues raised in paragraph 1, outline the need for any amendment or further recommendations which should be included in the Report. 2 Introduction The Review will encompass an audit of the recommendations contained in the Police Review as well as submissions from interested parties. It is not anticipated public hearings will be held or oral submissions taken apart from where the Reviewer considers that oral submissions are needed to enable proper assessment of written submissions.