Gun laws and politics: We should all have a say - Jarrod Gilbert

The Firearms Safety Authority receives around 60 flags per day. Photo / File

Dr Jarrod Gilbert is the Director of Independent Research Solutions and a sociologist at the University of Canterbury.

OPINION

A couple of months or so back I was meeting with one of New Zealand’s most senior cops and the conversation turned to firearms – illegal, legal and nefarious innovations like 3D printed guns. As an aside, he told me he had to get his personal firearms licence renewed and the rigour the process entailed – including three interviews (one with him and two with people known to him).

I interrupted him to say that I was impressed that police treated him as though he was just like anybody else.

But then I had another thought that cut straight across that. Given the time and resources required to do the checks, shouldn’t we be prioritising time on people who may cause harm?

I may not have thought too much more about it if it hadn’t been for an invitation I had to join the Arms Engagement Group (AEG). I was surprised by the invite. I’ve never owned a firearm, never had a licence, and my only experience with guns was shooting rabbits as a young lad on my uncle’s farm.

But the AEG is a body established for non-licence holders, the idea being that all New Zealanders, including those 4.7 million of us who don’t own a gun, are stakeholders in this issue. Meaning, non-gun people should have a voice, too. That was such an unusually cool idea – giving a voice to those not directly involved – that I said yes to being a member.

At my first meeting the very licencing issue I had discussed with the high-ranking cop came up. Changes were being made to licencing renewals from treating every person the same to a targeted renewal approach. Categories were created: low, moderate and significant. That means those firearms holders presenting no issues will be checked but checked more lightly than those who are. This makes sense, right?

Of the 234,000 licence holders, there are those – like the senior cop – who are of no concern to us, while others, due to changing circumstances of behaviour, may very well be.

The trick is how to ascertain who might need more attention. This comes by reviewing the application and what other information the Police may have on the applicant since they were last issued with a firearms licence. Police look to assess what might have changed in the applicant’s circumstances.

In an effort to ensure people remain ‘fit and proper’ Police have a process of Continuous Eligibility Scanning after the licence is issued

The Firearms Safety Authority receives around 60 flags per day, largely, but not exclusively, from the police database. For example, if a firearms licence holder is involved in an offence, a flag is raised. If the incident is minor, no action will be taken. But, if the issue is more serious, it may lead to the licence being suspended or revoked. Somewhere around 900 or 1,000 revocations happen each year.

If an offence is minor, for example a speeding offence - but it occurs multiple times in quick succession - it will lead to an investigation to check that the pattern of behaviour doesn’t signal something more serious underneath it.

In this way, the Firearms Safety Authority is regularly assessing people’s fitness to own a gun. I believe Kiwis will be pleased that this is happening. Quiet backstage action is far better than learning of a tragedy on the news.

But while most of us only have a relationship with firearms when they spark tragedy, for many New Zealanders guns are an everyday tool for use on farms or ranges. And this change in approach also benefits them. If people who are licence holders have no flags, then they will be able to renew their licences with less stress and inconvenience.

In the highly political world of gun ownership, it hard to see this approach as anything other than a classic win-win.