Are we doing enough on gun control?
Japan’s model goes much further and has demonstrated dramatic success
The latest shooting massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, has focused increased global attention on wholly inadequate gun control systems in most countries.
Indeed, as the federal government’s proposed new provisions show, there are inadequacies in our own system. In his initial statement of sympathy to Texans, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated his government had taken certain steps to strengthen our system, referring to increased background check requirements for gun purchases and the banning of certain types of military-style assault weapons. He concluded by committing to move forward to do more. We now have the government’s proposals. How adequate are they?
The U.S. and Canada are in marked contrast to Japan, whose protective system has been far superior for many years. My wife Betty and I lived in Tokyo for more than four years in the 1980s when I was posted there as agent general for the Asia Pacific region. We were impressed by the security of this hugely populated capital, and by its system referred to as the koban or police box in each region. These provide for 24-hour-aday community safety service, complemented when necessary by the immediate assistance of the larger central police forces.
Under this system, the needs and concerns of the residents are protected by well-trained and armed officers from these small, red-lighted boxlike structures. The police box technique, unique to Japan, enables the police to identify critical issues without delay and call centrally located assistance where required.
In Japan, gun control is covered by detailed and effective legislation as well as enforcement. The Japanese have enacted four statutes, the principal one being the Firearms and Swords Control Act. These related legislative provisions, and their positive effect, is dealt with in a study published by Australia’s University of Sydney in 2020.
Guns held by Tokyo residents have been reduced by more than 50 per cent over the last 12 years as a result of the prompt knowledge of threats and the committed enforcement of the legislative requirements and their related regulations.
The number of gun deaths in Japan has been reduced from 101 in 2000 to nine in 2018, resulting in an annual rate of deaths from firearms to 0.01 per cent per 100,000 population. The U.S. National Vital Statistics System reports that in America in 2020, there were 45,222 firearm deaths at an annual rate of 13.7 per cent per 100,000 population.
In Japan, private possession of handguns is prohibited, with exceptions granted, following strict review, by a safety commission. Applicants for firearms are required to establish a genuine reason for their use: i.e., “hunting, target shooting, or as an acquisition for an art collection.” There is statutory provision for the denial or revocation of licences where there is any likelihood of family turbulence or violence. All licensees must reapply and retest to qualify for licence renewal every three years. Licensed owners are entitled to possess only one qualified firearm per year.
Private sale and/or transfer of firearms are prohibited; only licensed dealers may make sales and transfers. Carrying a gun in plain view is prohibited; carrying a concealed firearm is subject to government review. Unlawful possession of a firearm carries a maximum penalty of 15 years. Private possession of semi-automatic assault-style weapons is strictly limited.
To return to Canada, Trudeau committed “to move forward and do more.” Despite the previous changes already made to firearm controls, the reported data are sharply negative over the last decade and show the need for sharply increased gun control, legislative measures and effective enforcement.
Our public anguish over the Texas tragedy raises the question: Do the government’s new proposals address the key issues adequately?