If the need exists for stricter gun control, CHASA will be prepared to support a just, equitable and enforceable Bill, but under no circumstances can CHASA be expected to support a Bill containing provisions which infringe upon the rights of the law abiding gun owner. We are strongly opposed to stipulations which would make it unreasonably difficult for applicants/owners to obtain and/or retain firearm licences. We also oppose provisions which place unnecessary burdens on legal owners and groups of owners whereby they are forced to comply with minor requirements, while these requirements serve no or very little purpose. In the premises we refer to inter alia Renewal of licences, The sweeping powers awarded to the minister, The restriction of the amount of firearms in cases where good cause is shown, Some requirements for a competency certificate, The unreasonableness of some grounds for a declaration of unfitness, Presumptions with a direct bearing on the normal rights of citizens.

We submit herewith our representations and shall appreciate the opportunity for verbal discussions with Committee to more fully explain our views and recommendations.

Section 1(1) p 10

Reference to muzzle energy poses a problem as we doubt many law-enforcement officers would be capable of assessing while some nr1 airguns develop more energy than 8 joules. For the same reason the definition of "specially dangerous airgun" could create a problem. We recommend that both definitions should refer to nr. 1 and nr. 2 airguns as these concepts have been clearly crystallised throughout the years. Both hunting fraternity as well as law enforcement officers will have more certainty as to what is referred to. It is also recommended that with reference to "airgun" the word "fire" is to be replaced by the word "propel".

As the "new" category of "Dedicated Hunter" created in die Draft is acceptable, it definitely does not specifically describe the existing category of Bona Fide Hunter, as this category already exists, being hunters on a higher ethical and performance level and being registered as such by the Central Firearms Register. Serious consideration must be given to define this category and regulate its privileges in accordance with its responsibilities and status.

Section 5(1) p 13

To be included under this heading "a device used to project objects used for target practice shooting and/or dog training."

Section 7(2)(p14

Why is it necessary to restrict the sale of airguns "only through a licensed dealer", since an airgun is not a firearm.

Section 8(1) (14)

Bona fide hunters are a group of people who by being declared "Bona Fide" have already been subjected to intense scrutiny and found fit to be granted that status. People of this category have undergone tests to determine integrity capability and ethics. We propose that this category be exempted from the requirement to produce a competency certificate.

Section 10(3)(f) p 15

"Has not been convicted of an offence in terms of this Act or the previous Act".

This section makes for some concern with reference to persons found guilty under the present Act but not declared unfit. To render such a person unfit would amount to an injustice .

The same comment as in Section 10(3) (f).

"Has not been convicted, whether in or outside South Africa, of an offence involving the abuse of alcohol or drugs, whether committed in or outside South Africa"

If "abuse of alcohol or drugs" include drunken driving , which we believe, it could lead to unfair results. These convictions should clearly relate to instances where the handling of firearms is an element. .

As described to the Drafting Team these restraining orders are issued easily on a concise statement by the complainant, the source of the evil in the majority of cases to be a marital disagreement between the parties. In numerous cases the parties reconcile as a result of which the affected party fails to avoid a final order being granted. This could injure the rights of the Respondent.

The period of two years is too short and therefore unpractical. We recommend that this period be extended to five years or ten years to run concurrently with the validity period of firearm licences, or valid for the period that the holder of the certificate is not found incompetent in terms of Section 10 (3) of this Act.

Section 14(1) p 17

A semi-automatic shotgun should be allowed for hunting purposes as numerous hunters and sports people utilize same for clay target shooting and bird hunting. Rather consider a restriction on the barrel length for sports people and hunters.

We recommend that a person be allowed 2 firearms of different calibres, for self-defence purposes on good cause shown and that special provision be made by permit for land owners and businessmen in potentially dangerous areas.

The same comment applies as in Section 14 (1) (a).

It is unpractical for the chairperson to investigate the position of each individual member (applicant) as members reside over the country. The applicant, whether a bona fide person or not, is the one to satisfy the registrar; we therefore recommend a letter by the chairperson confirming membership and status.

Will minors be allowed to use a firearm under supervision of a parent/instructor?

It is recommended that the identification mark be stamped on the barrel only as all firearms presently manufactured bear the mark on the barrel only.

The renewal of licences poses a severe problem as it places an unnecessary burden on the legal owner of firearms. We understand that after promulgation of a new Act a re-registering process will be implemented which is an audit to upgrade the database of the Central Firearms Registrar. The only motivation for a system of renewal of licences is for the Registrar to establish whether licence holders are still competent to hold their valid licences. This is totally not acceptable to CHASA because of the mere fact

that the same goal can be achieved by an auditing process which is less costly and time consuming to both firearm owners and Government. We are also concerned by the fact that a valid firearms licence lapses for no reason at all and leaves the legal owner with definite rights removed from him or her. We most strongly oppose this measure.

Section 32 (2) p 28

This restriction places an unnecessary financial burden on the seller. We understand the process to be the registering of the transaction by the dealer by recording the particulars. This obligation undoubtedly creates a financial burden and raises the question whether a fee will be payable to the dealer, and if so, will it be restricted to a percentage of the value of the transaction ?

Why the additional obligation on the seller to notify the Registrar if the Registrar is already informed through the records of the dealer?

Reloaders reload different calibres of ammunition, which requires different types of propellant; therefore the restriction should clearly be 2.5 kilograms of propellant for each calibre for which that propellant is used. Section 48 (2) (b) to be amended accordingly.

To slightly alter the length of a barrel is often necessary to improve the balance or handling of a firearm. This modification could validly improve the firearm for the purposes for which the owner purchase it. It would therefore be totally unreasonable to have to obtain the authority of the Registrar to effect this modification. It would be reasonable to restrict the maximum by which a firearm barrel could be shortened or lengthened by the owner to say 10cm.

Section 97 (2) and (3) p 47

This restriction is unrealistic. The standard practise when purchasing shotgun and .22 ammunition is that a case or box of 500 cartridges is normally bought both for convenience and cost reduction. A great deal of shots are fired with these firearms. It is common practice, particularly during sunflower season to fire up to 400 shots during a day session. A three-day shooting outing can therefore account for 1200 cartridges. All this restriction will achieve is to criminalize the legal shotgunner in the normal pursuance of his sport. We therefore recommend that the said restriction be removed for shotgunners (especially dedicated, bona fide and sports people) and with regard to rifle cartridges, for bona fide hunters.

Section 107 (1) and (3) p 51

Such a declaration will severely effect the rights of the firearm owner and we therefore strongly recommend that the audi alterem partem rule and the right to representation be applied with regard to any inquiry.

As this section now stands, it reduces the functions of the Court to a mere rubber stamp. The Court must have a discretion to consider the circumstances of each case . The Court must have a discretion to make an order that the accused person is not unfit to possess a firearm.

Section 114 (1) p 55

The powers awarded to the police are too wide and will definitely infringe upon the right to privacy, which appears to be unconstitutional. We would suggest that after the word "Act", where it appears in subsection (g), the following words be inserted : "if he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the provisions of this Act is not being complied with".

Section 117 (1) (a) and (b) p 56

With regard to subsection (a) it is not clear as to whom must have the "suspicion" and with regard to subsection (b) it appears that unlimited rights are awarded the police to search without the existence of reasonable grounds. It is therefore recommended that with regard to both subsections the following words be inserted: "if he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the provisions of this Act is not being complied with."

For obvious reasons it is recommended that samples of genetic material should only be taken by medically qualified persons and not by police officials.

Section 123 (1 ) to (3)

We are totally opposed to the presumptions created by the above section. These presumptions will undoubtedly result in the arrest of totally innocent citizens because of the mere fact that they were present on some premises at a given time. The further implication is that such an innocent person can be detained for 48 hours before a bail application can be brought.

This section is in conflict with judgements of the Constitutional Court with regard to the reverse burden of proof. We fail to understand why this attempt to enact these presumptions in spite of the above mentioned judgements of the Constitutional Court and in spite of the established general trend to move away from presumptions.

See our comment with regard to section 123 above.

Section 136 p 69

Since hunting is a specialized field, we recommend that CHASA be awarded a seat on the Appeal Board.

Section 157 p 75

The powers of the Minister are too wide and of a sweeping nature which could well lead to an abuse of regulatory power. The Minister may, by regulation, severely affect fundamental rights of firearm owners. It is of great concern that powers are awarded the Minister to virtually amend the most fundamental stipulations of the Act by passing a regulation without public scrutiny. We strongly recommend that a clear distinction be drawn between general matters as opposed to matters relating to important rights of firearm owners and that the latter can only be affected by an amendment to the Act or by regulation tabled in both Houses of Parliament with reasonable opportunity to firearm owners for comment.

The rights of landowners to use their property

No provision is made in the Act for individuals who own land to shoot upon that land and it therefore appears that the fundamental rights of landowners to use and enjoy their property are affected. It is often safer to shoot on private land, such as farmland and it is also reasonable that other licensed firearms can be discharged by their owners on a farmer’s land. We recommend that the restrictions on where to discharge firearms should just refer to "appropriate premises or property", and if necessary, include "farmland".

The Bill does not subject State Employees to the same requirements that private citizens will be subject to with regard to competency and licensing requirements. This aspect will need some discussion and clarification.

DATED at KIMBERLEY this 31^st day of January 2000

________________

André Potgieter

Chairman