Dr Rachel Jewkes, Senior Specialist Scientist, Acting Director, Women’s Health Research Unit, Medical Research Council

Ms Naeema Abrahams, Scientist, Women’s Health Research Unit,

18 August 2000

Violence against women is the main research focus of the Women’s Health Research Unit of the Medical Research Council. Our research strongly supports the need for effective firearm control in South Africa as firearms are a very important weapon used to intimidate and injure women and facilitate rape.

The research of the Women’s Health Research Unit shows that domestic violence and rape are part of the daily lives of many women in our country. In 1998 we interviewed a random probability sample of 1306 women in the Northern Province, Eastern Cape and Mpumalanga. We spoke to women in rural and urban areas across the provinces and found that one in ten reported having experienced physical violence or threatened with a weapon in the previous year. We also found that two out of every hundred had been raped or experienced attempted rape in the previous year.

In the year prior to the study 1.5% had been threatened or attacked with firearms. In other words, there were 150 firearm related episodes per 100 000 women aged 18-49 in those provinces in that year. In 25% of these cases the perpetrator was a current or ex-husband or boyfriend. There were 74 firearm related incidents of domestic violence per 100 000 women aged 18-49 in the Eastern Cape and 47 incidents of domestic violence per 100 000 women aged 18-49 in Mpumalanga. A quarter of all the weapons used in all violent incidents were guns.

The rate of firearm episodes in one year reported here was ten times as higher than the annual rate reported by both men and women in a community-based study of firearm related episodes in the home conducted in the United States, which is another country with a high level of weapon ownership (42% of households have a gun). Although most guns in the United States are kept for self-defence, research indicates that a gun at home is very much more likely to be used against a family member than it is in self-defence^2,, . In the majority of cases it was used against a woman by an intimate partner.

There is a considerable amount of evidence of the use of guns during rape. Firearms featured prominently in the series of rape survivors who attended Hillbrow, Lenasia South and Chris Hani Baragwanath medico-legal clinics between 1996-1998. In 55% of rapes a weapon was used, 35% of the weapons were firearms.

The recently released report of the findings of the Victims of Crime Survey of Statistics South Africa on rape shows that in 87% of attacks by more than one perpetrator a weapon was used. In 56% of attacks by a lone rapist a weapon was used. 17% of the weapons used were guns. From their data Statistics South Africa concluded that 27 325 rapes at gun point took place in South Africa between 1993-1997. Commenting on this finding earlier this week, Pat Mayhew of the Crime and Criminal Justice Unit of the British Home Office noted that the level of firearm use in rape in South Africa was unparalleled even in the United States.

We must conclude that women are at high risk of being threatened or shot with firearms. The high proportion of the perpetrators of these attacks are current or ex-intimate partners indicates that the threat to women is very real within the home and not just outside the home. The findings also highlight the importance of preventing gun ownership amongst male perpetrators of domestic violence.

Effective gun control is therefore a necessary part of any strategy to reduce violent crime against women in the country. Research from the Unites States suggests that, even after taking into account questions of self-defence, women are very much safer in homes without guns. Women would be much safer in a society with fewer guns.

2.1 We commend the spirit of the proposed legislation and regard it as having a valuable contribution to make towards the important goal of reducing firearm related violence in South Africa.

2.2 We welcome the provisions for Competency Certificates, with regular renewal of licences and, in particular, welcome the inclusion of domestic violence in the list of offences to be considered before a competency certificate may be issued, and the proposed new system of linked data bases with the new Central Firearms Register. We particularly welcome the provision that having ever been subject to a restraining order in terms of domestic violence legislation should lead to a life long barring of access to a legal firearm and that a competency certificate should not be issued to a person under a temporary restraining order. We further recommend that the process for establishing the mental stability of a person and their dependance on drugs or alcohol be spelled out.

2.3 We welcome the provision for creating firearm free zones, and regard designating schools as particularly important. This will contribute towards protecting school girls from rape in and near schools.

2.4 We welcome the move to raise the age of eligibility for firearms but consider the age of 18 to be still far too young. We believe that the minimum age should be raised to 25 for hand gun ownership.

The challenge in making South Africa a safer place to live is to reduce the readily availability of the means to commit violent crime and use maximum force in resolving conflict. Not only has violent crime reached epidemic proportions, but you have heard in previous Medical Research Council submissions that violent deaths of young people (particularly men) have reached alarming proportions. We are truly in a situation where we must say that drastic problems require drastic solutions. The freedom of a few young people to have a licenced handgun is currently being exercised at the expense of the majority.

Young people do not need hand guns. People under the age of 25 rarely own property which would make them a significant target for violent theft. Should they need to defend themselves in this way, they are normally agile enough to effectively deploy other weapons in self-defence e.g. sticks or cricket bats. Its important to remember that guns are not the only weapon people have available. Our research has shown that young men are far more likely to sexually and physically assault their partners, as well as rape strangers, than older men ^,,. Restricting access to firearms in this age group should therefore make a disproportional contribution to reducing violent crime.

The current low age for gun ownership means that guns are legally accessible to young people during years of their lives when essentially they are still immature. Although a considerable amount of youth gun ownership is undoubtedly unlicenced, the ability of the police to take action when they see young people with hand guns is restricted by the possibility that hand guns could be legal in this age group. The police would find it considerably easier if they were to know that any young person with a hand gun would be breaking the law.

The immaturity of youth in their early 20s and propensity of this group to risk taking behaviour is well recognised in other areas of society and measures to accommodate this are accepted. The most obvious is the insurance industry which always charges a higher premium for drivers under 25 years, the inherent reasonableness of this measure is rarely questioned. Restricting the liberty of adults under 25 to own handguns seems a small price to pay for enhancing the safety of the community as a whole.

2.5 Part of the consequences of any conviction for any of the offences listed in subsection (3) should mean a permanent disqualification from competency to possess a firearm.

2.6 Part of the responsibility for carrying a firearm in a public place should be a requirement that it be carried in a holster.

2.8 We believe that unless persons who have firearms in excess of the stipulated number are required to dispose of them through a licensed dealer, the objective of reducing the number of unlicenced guns in circulation will be undermined. We see no reason why the requirement that all gun transactions be through licenced dealers should not be brought into effect immediately.

2.9 We are concerned that many women are reluctant to take out Protection Orders or prosecute their partner. In our research we have come across situations where a woman is threatened with a gun by her husband, goes to the police but does not take it further. We are believe that there should be a clause which states that it is brought to the attention of a police officer that a gun has been used for violent purposes, including threats of violence, they should be empowered to confiscate the gun and apply to have the man banned for legal firearm ownership. It should not be necessary for any person to press charges for this. If it is not possible to do this then provision should be made for this information to be used, at the very least, in preventing licence renewal.

2.10 The five year period of grace before existing licenced gun holders must apply for new licences is too long. We would suggest that the period be reduced to three years and that it be brought in an a phased manner, as the introduction of new drivers licences has been, so that a third of all gun owners will have their licences renewed each year for the first three years. This seems essential in order to make tangible progress towards a reduction in the number of firearms owned and disbarment of people who do not meet the new standards for the Competency Certificate.

2.11 We cannot understand why there should be any civilians should have a need for a licence for a semi-automatic weapon, carbine or shot gun. We would suggest that these are also placed in the restricted category.

2.12 We very much welcome the stringent restrictions on the number of firearms a person may own as a contribution towards overall gun control. We support the limitation of one firearm per person applying for a licence on the grounds of self-defence.

2.13 We acknowledge that members of the SAPS, SANDF and department of Correctional Services need to carry firearms for some of their duties but we are none the less concerned that some officials may be unfit to do so. We know that e.g. in the SAPS suicide and family murder is quite common and that many SAPS members are in abusive relationships. Service pistols are commonly used for suicide and family murder. We recommend that members of these organisations be subject to the same criteria as those listed in Section 11 to establish whether they are ‘fit and proper’ to possess a firearm. We also recommend that employees listed in section 101 (6) (a) only be allowed to have a firearm in their possession after working hours or to store it in their home if they make a specific application motivating why this should be necessary. At present the Bill suggests that authorisation is purely administrative.

The views expressed here are the views of Women’s Health Research Unit and not necessarily the Medical Research Council.