The JEP reported the following story:
“THERE are more than 2,400 semi-automatic weapons in the Island but Jersey has no plans to alter its gun laws in the wake of the Christchurch terror attack, the Home Affairs Minister has said.”
“Constable Len Norman stressed laws in the Island were ‘robust enough’ but conceded New Zealand’s parliament might have said the same prior to last week’s attack at a mosque in Christchurch which killed 50 people, including women and children. Asked whether there was any room for discussion about altering Jersey’s laws, Mr Norman said: ‘Our gun laws are robust enough as they are and I don’t see any reason for change. Terror attacks can happen in any jurisdiction, absolutely, Jersey included, but now is not the time for knee-jerk reactions. ‘Terror like this can happen anywhere and everywhere and that’s why we need to be vigilant and have robust procedures in place – like we do – but nothing is guaranteed.’”
While there are strong procedures, we should be aware that New Zealand said exactly the same, which Len does concede... and then does nothing! An immediate ban would be a knee-jerk reaction, but a re-appraisal of gun control, and a critical probe of any weaknesses would be wise.
As the New Zealand Prime Minister stated in a press release:
“There were five guns used by the primary perpetrator. There were two semi-automatic weapons and two shotguns. The offender was in possession of a gun license.”
CNN reports that Australia curtailed the use of semi-automatic weapons after a fatal shooting:
“Gun laws in Australia were tightened following a 1996 mass shooting in which 35 people were killed by a lone gunman in Port Arthur, Tasmania. Within two weeks, Australian lawmakers banned rapid-fire rifles and shotguns and introduced tighter laws governing ownership of other weapons.”
Semi-automatic weapons self-load a new bullet after every trigger pull, rather than requiring the shooter to manually load one, enabling the wielder to fire off rounds more quickly.
A hand-gun such as a revolver would generally be a manual load weapon, since it takes human power to advance the cylinder.
There has actually not been a great deal of scientific research, but in 2018, a paper was published in the journal of the American Medical Association looking at US statistics.
It was entitled "Scientific research Lethality of Civilian Active Shooter Incidents With and Without Semiautomatic Rifles in the United States" and was compiled by Elzerie de Jager, MBBS(Hons), Eric Goralnick, MD, MS2 and Justin C. McCarty, DO1
Popular Science summarised the results:
“The research looked at every incident in the FBI database from 2000 to 2017 and ended up with 248 shootings, a quarter of which involved a semi-automatic weapon. Most of the rest featured handguns, followed by shotguns and then non-semi-automatic rifles. In those 248 incidents, shooters collectively killed 718 people and wounded 898.”
“Attacks with a semi-automatic rifle were more dangerous and more deadly. An average of 4.25 people died in those attacks versus 2.49 in those with non-semi-automatic firearms. And although 44 percent of those wounded ended up dying of their injuries regardless of the type of weapon used, those armed with semi-automatic rifles were also able to wound more people: an average of 5.48 versus 3.02.”
Potential gun owners in New Zealand must be over the age of 16 and pass a police background check, according to GunPolicy.org and its founder Professor Philip Alpers.
Alpers told CNN: "It's always a terrible surprise when this sort of thing happens. You can never predict where it's going to happen. The most common comment you get from people when this sort of thing happens is that they never thought it could happen here and that's how the people of Christchurch must be feeling."
The JEP noted that “A spokesman for the police said that if the force became aware of a person in the Island showing extremist tendencies, they would be able to seize weapons if there was an imminent threat.”
That’s a very optimistic position to take, and assumes a lot of knowledge about how public someone planning a massacre will be. However, when these massacres take place, there is usually no signalling that it is about to happen, especially when it is a lone individual rather than a terrorist group. Police intelligence in other jurisdictions has not so far been very effective in preventative action.
This massacre has been a wake-up call in New Zealand, and it should be a wake-up call in Jersey. While changes may not be necessary, and there have been no recorded incidents in the past, we are now living in a far more fractured and tribal world, and a re-appraisal would certainly be prudent. This should focus not just on the controls, but how an incident could be contained as rapidly as possible if it did occur.
“THERE are more than 2,400 semi-automatic weapons in the Island but Jersey has no plans to alter its gun laws in the wake of the Christchurch terror attack, the Home Affairs Minister has said.”
“Constable Len Norman stressed laws in the Island were ‘robust enough’ but conceded New Zealand’s parliament might have said the same prior to last week’s attack at a mosque in Christchurch which killed 50 people, including women and children. Asked whether there was any room for discussion about altering Jersey’s laws, Mr Norman said: ‘Our gun laws are robust enough as they are and I don’t see any reason for change. Terror attacks can happen in any jurisdiction, absolutely, Jersey included, but now is not the time for knee-jerk reactions. ‘Terror like this can happen anywhere and everywhere and that’s why we need to be vigilant and have robust procedures in place – like we do – but nothing is guaranteed.’”
While there are strong procedures, we should be aware that New Zealand said exactly the same, which Len does concede... and then does nothing! An immediate ban would be a knee-jerk reaction, but a re-appraisal of gun control, and a critical probe of any weaknesses would be wise.
As the New Zealand Prime Minister stated in a press release:
“There were five guns used by the primary perpetrator. There were two semi-automatic weapons and two shotguns. The offender was in possession of a gun license.”
CNN reports that Australia curtailed the use of semi-automatic weapons after a fatal shooting:
“Gun laws in Australia were tightened following a 1996 mass shooting in which 35 people were killed by a lone gunman in Port Arthur, Tasmania. Within two weeks, Australian lawmakers banned rapid-fire rifles and shotguns and introduced tighter laws governing ownership of other weapons.”
Semi-automatic weapons self-load a new bullet after every trigger pull, rather than requiring the shooter to manually load one, enabling the wielder to fire off rounds more quickly.
A hand-gun such as a revolver would generally be a manual load weapon, since it takes human power to advance the cylinder.
There has actually not been a great deal of scientific research, but in 2018, a paper was published in the journal of the American Medical Association looking at US statistics.
It was entitled "Scientific research Lethality of Civilian Active Shooter Incidents With and Without Semiautomatic Rifles in the United States" and was compiled by Elzerie de Jager, MBBS(Hons), Eric Goralnick, MD, MS2 and Justin C. McCarty, DO1
Popular Science summarised the results:
“The research looked at every incident in the FBI database from 2000 to 2017 and ended up with 248 shootings, a quarter of which involved a semi-automatic weapon. Most of the rest featured handguns, followed by shotguns and then non-semi-automatic rifles. In those 248 incidents, shooters collectively killed 718 people and wounded 898.”
“Attacks with a semi-automatic rifle were more dangerous and more deadly. An average of 4.25 people died in those attacks versus 2.49 in those with non-semi-automatic firearms. And although 44 percent of those wounded ended up dying of their injuries regardless of the type of weapon used, those armed with semi-automatic rifles were also able to wound more people: an average of 5.48 versus 3.02.”
Potential gun owners in New Zealand must be over the age of 16 and pass a police background check, according to GunPolicy.org and its founder Professor Philip Alpers.
Alpers told CNN: "It's always a terrible surprise when this sort of thing happens. You can never predict where it's going to happen. The most common comment you get from people when this sort of thing happens is that they never thought it could happen here and that's how the people of Christchurch must be feeling."
The JEP noted that “A spokesman for the police said that if the force became aware of a person in the Island showing extremist tendencies, they would be able to seize weapons if there was an imminent threat.”
That’s a very optimistic position to take, and assumes a lot of knowledge about how public someone planning a massacre will be. However, when these massacres take place, there is usually no signalling that it is about to happen, especially when it is a lone individual rather than a terrorist group. Police intelligence in other jurisdictions has not so far been very effective in preventative action.
This massacre has been a wake-up call in New Zealand, and it should be a wake-up call in Jersey. While changes may not be necessary, and there have been no recorded incidents in the past, we are now living in a far more fractured and tribal world, and a re-appraisal would certainly be prudent. This should focus not just on the controls, but how an incident could be contained as rapidly as possible if it did occur.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment