FIREARMS AMENDMENT BILL SPARKS DEBATE OVER SELF-DEFENCE AND SECURITY

Mon 07 April 2025:

The proposed Firearms Control Amendment Bill has ignited widespread public opposition and political backlash across South Africa. At the centre of the controversy is the Bill’s attempt to overhaul the Firearms Control Act of 2000 — with critics warning that it could disempower law-abiding citizens while failing to address the core issues fuelling violent crime.

One of the most contentious aspects of the Firearms Amendment Bill is the proposed removal of “self-defence” as a valid reason for firearm ownership. This, along with new restrictions on the quantity of ammunition and types of firearms permitted, has drawn sharp criticism from security experts, opposition parties, and civil society organisations.

__________________________________________________________________________

https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaAtNxX8fewmiFmN7N22

__________________________________________________________________________

Security Sector Raises Practical Concerns

Yaseen Theba, director of private security firm Vision Tactical, expressed serious reservations in an interview with Salaamedia, highlighting the ambiguity of the Bill’s language.

“The amendments that they’re aiming at are so vague that the interpretation is left to so much scrutiny,” Theba said. “To give an example, the amendments on firearm ammunition refer to ‘no more than a reasonable amount of ammunition’. What would define a reasonable amount of ammunition?”

Theba stressed that in a country where spontaneous protest action can erupt, private security companies need sufficient resources to respond effectively.

“We need to be prepared at all times,” he added. “We’re in an environment where we’re pretty regulated already… These recommendations are just a number of burdens for companies that are already complying.”

Instead of introducing new regulations, Theba called for better enforcement of existing laws.

“What we are saying is that PSIRA and the South African Police should enforce the laws that are already there, on companies that are not complying.”

Political Opposition

The Democratic Alliance (DA) has been vocal in its rejection of the Firearms Amendment Bill. In a statement, the party criticised the Bill for undermining South Africans’ right to self-protection in a country plagued by high levels of violent crime.

“We oppose this Bill as one of the pieces of legislation that will be processed during this financial year,” the DA stated. “Instead of disarming law-abiding South Africans, SAPS must do more to keep criminals away from firearms.”

ActionSA has also launched a campaign against the Bill, arguing that it targets legal gun owners while doing little to curb the illegal firearms trade. The party maintains that the Bill is out of touch with the lived reality of South Africans.

“The Bill empowers criminals but hurts YOU,” ActionSA said in its public submission. “Criminals will continue to own and use illegal weapons against law-abiding citizens. The amendment to the Act fails to improve public safety.”

Public Safety vs Public Rights

Proponents of the Firearms Amendment Bill, including some government officials, argue that the changes are necessary to stem the tide of gun-related violence. A recent opinion piece in News24 highlighted that firearms remain the leading weapon used in violent crimes in South Africa, underscoring the urgent need for reform.

However, critics argue that the Bill fails to address the root causes of gun violence — such as corruption, poor policing, and the proliferation of illegal firearms — and instead places undue pressure on responsible gun owners and private security firms.

With opposition mounting and calls for a national firearms audit growing louder, the future of the Firearms Amendment Bill remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the debate has reignited broader questions about safety, governance, and the role of armed self-defence in a democratic South Africa.