Chapter 3

LEVELS OF FIREARM OWNERSHIP

Chapter overview

People are reluctant to admit to owning a firearm in quantitative surveys. For this reason, it is necessary to obtain this information in another manner, such as through the indicator of associated firearm ownership. Associated firearm ownership is based on the premise that people live and interact largely with other people of similar values and outlook on life. As a result of this, what is an acceptable norm to one person is usually an acceptable norm to their friends and family (that is, their social circle, peers and significant others). The extent to which this assumption holds across all communities is questionable, but as a rule it generally holds.

In this chapter we consider levels of firearm ownership. Although it is difficult to pinpoint it on an individual level, we are able to link levels of ownership to settlement areas. The chapter also considers the reasons why people own guns. Drawing on both the quantitative and the qualitative findings, the chapter delves into some of the factors underlying firearm ownership. These factors, quite naturally, closely mirror the factors informing the increase in firearm penetration as discussed in the previous chapter.

Associated firearm posession

A useful indicator of firearm penetration is that of associated firearm possession. One of the measures of this indicator is gained by asking the question: "Do you have a close friend or family member who has a gun?" In response to this question, it was found that associated firearm possession was highest in the Lekoa-Vaal urban formal area (55.5% of this sample indicated they knew a close friend or family member with a firearm) and in the Tsolo-Qumbo rural homestead area (40.1% of the respective sample). Firearm possession was lowest amongst the Lekoa-Vaal urban informal settlement respondents (19.4%) and in the Lekoa-Vaal hostels (11.3%).

What was immediately obvious was that associated firearm possession was highest in the two areas that in the previous section showed relatively low firearm penetration. The reason for this could be that associated firearms possession usually refers to firearms largely in the possession of residents, and firearm penetration to people from both within and outside the area for criminal purposes, as well as the existing residents.

Although the respondent was asked whether or not the firearm considered in the 'associated firearm possession' was licensed or not, little confidence was placed in this finding. It is generally believed that the level of honesty with regard to such a question is low, given the fact that it is illegal to possess an unlicensed firearm in South Africa. For similar reasons, the respondent may not know the licensing status of a firearm in the possession of a friend. There is reason to believe that in some of the cases the respondents may be speaking about their own firearm status (as opposed to that of a friend or family member) when answering this question. However, of this there is no way to be certain.

Ease of access to a firearm

The ease of access to a firearm as indicated by a 'yes' response to the question "Do you have easy access to a gun if you need one?" is shown in the table below.

The highest accessibility to a firearm was amongst people from the Lekoa-Vaal urban formal areas (32.2%) and Tsolo-Qumbo rural homestead areas (27.2%). Ease of access was lowest amongst the respondents from the Kwa Mashu hostels (15.8%), the Lekoa-Vaal hostels (20.0%) and the Lekoa-Vaal urban informal areas (22.1%)

Access to a firearm was also correlated with gender and age. It was found that men (31.5%) have better access to firearms than women (21.8%). Similarly, respondents between the ages of 20 and 29 years have higher access to firearms than respondents of other age groups. There was no difference between the levels of access of respondents under 30 years old (27.0%) and those over 30 years old (26.3%). However, when the age categories were broken down in more detail, a clearer picture emerged, showing that ease of access to firearms varied by age. Respondents between the ages of 20 and 29 years have higher access to firearms than respondents in the other age groups.The highest willingness to own a firearm was expressed by the 20 to 29-year-old respondents, while respondents under the age of 20 and over the age of 60 were the least willing to own a firearm across the entire sample.

Kwa Mashu snapshot: ease of getting a firearm All 20 respondents felt that it was easy to obtain a firearm. Some of the reasons given included: "You can even hire [firearms] from other people at cheaper price." - Male school dropout "[Obtaining a firearm] is as easy as buying sweets." - Male, ordinary young person "There are many guys here who are firearm dealers." - Male who served time in prison for armed robbery "[Obtaining a firearm] is as easy as peanuts. Even from the police or military force members it just a minor task." - Male school-going pupil

Ease of access to a firearm often closely mirrored the pattern of the associated firearm possession.

The willingness of respondents to own a firearm is indicated by a 'yes' response to the question "Would you personally own a gun?" On the whole, respondents from Lekoa-Vaal were the most willing to own a gun, as indicated by 51.3% of the Lekoa-Vaal informal settlement respondents, 50% of the Lekoa-Vaal hostel respondents and 49.9% of the Lekoa-Vaal formal settlement respondents. Respondents from Tsolo-Qumbo (43.8% of the sample) were also willing to personally own a gun.

Male respondents (44.9%) were more willing to own a firearm than the female respondents (34.3%).

The main reason for this willingness to own a gun was given as the need 'for self-defence or protection' (77.2%) and the secondary reason cited for this was 'for security reasons' (12.0%).

The main reasons for not wanting to own a firearm were given as the 'fear of firearms' (33.8%), the 'lack of necessity to have a gun' (17.2%) and the 'temptation of unintentional injury to oneself and others' (15.0%).

Kwa Mashu snapshot: the necessity for a firearm In South Africa, it is more and more commonplace for households to obtain firearms. Often this is a choice made in reaction to rising levels of crime. A concept that was raised on a number of times in the research process was 'whether or not it was a necessity to carry a firearm'. What was immediately evident was that some people obtained firearms in response to a fear that the police were not going to assist should they be victimised. In the Kwa Mashu snapshot, this theme was explored. Four of the respondents claimed that it was necessary to carry a firearm in their community. Only one respondent felt that it was only 'sometimes' necessary. The remainder of the sample felt that carrying a firearm in Kwa Mashu was unnecessary and risky. Carrying a firearm was seen as risky since it made the person with the firearm a target. "[Firearms are] not necessary if only carried as a show-off or to intimidate innocent citizens." - Male who served time in prison for armed robbery "It is unsafe in my area to be know as having a gun." - Male involved in illegal activity of selling marijuana "[Carrying a firearm] is risky even for the police officers. Once you are identified as carrying a gun you are a target. The attackers just shoot and make it a point that you are dead and the gun is gone for good." - Male school-going pupil "[By carrying a firearm] you are risking your life because the hooligans are hunting for them at whatever cost. Even if it means death and blood." - Female school-going pupil "[Carrying a firearm] is not necessary because once you get angry you just shoot to kill, and once you have a gun you play big and undermine others." - Female school dropout

Kwa Mashu and Tsolo-Qumbo focus groups: nature of firearm penetration

Negative connotations were always used to describe the nature of firearm penetration within the Kwa Mashu and Tsolo-Qumbo areas. It was felt in Tsolo-Qumbo and Kwa Mashu that firearms create problems. The main problems were identified as follows:

Firearms are used to solve small conflicts that could otherwise be solved without violence.



Firearms are carried by people who are not responsible enough.



Firearms create instability in the community.



Guns are used when there is in-fighting.



People carrying guns are not good role-models for children.



Bullets hit even passers-by.



Guns are used to commit crimes.



Guns are used by people seeking revenge.

Different people in the community carry firearms for different reasons:

Self-protection or the protection of property and business and the guns carried by ordinary residence and business people (often as a result of a loss of confidence in the police);



For criminal or violent reasons as carried by criminals and violent people;



People who think they are 'big shots' in the community and use their guns to show off (for status reasons);



Some people are forced to own firearms because of the situation they find themselves in and the violent environment in which they live (out of a lack of choice);



Some people own guns because they see people carrying guns on television (because of the examples set by role-models).

The youth in the Kwa Mashu focus group continually demonstrated a level of tolerance and sympathy towards the carrying of firearms. This was shown when they listed the different types of people that carry guns. According to the Kwa Mashu youth, there are a number of different types of people who own firearms, although most no longer carry these guns openly because of the gangs. The different types of people who own guns and were mentioned by the youth included:

Youth in general


People seeking popularity


Business people


Gangsters


Single parents


Criminals


People who have been victims of violence themselves

Those who obtained a firearm in response to crime

Also of interest to this research is which respondents obtained a firearm as a form of household crime prevention. It was indicated that the respondents from the Lekoa-Vaal formal area and Tsolo-Qumbo most readily obtained firearms for this purpose.

In order to further profile firearm ownership, it was interesting to see who obtained firearms as a crime-prevention strategy. Firearm ownership was one of the less frequent crime-prevention strategies identified, although in Tsolo-Qumbo (9.3%) and the Lekoa-Vaal formal settlement (13.7%) a proportion of the respondents did purchase firearms for this purpose.

Across the sample, the most common actions for preventing household crime were reporting crimes or criminals to the police or to the community or street committee, obtaining a dog to raise the alarm in case of an intruder, or installing a burglar alarm. Overall, a quarter of the respondents did not take any action to prevent crime.

The crime-prevention action varied sharply according to the type of settlement area. This is most evident in the proportion of the respective samples that did not take any action to prevent crime. It was found that 62.5% of the respondents from the Lekoa-Vaal hostel and 54.9% of the respondents from the Lekoa-Vaal informal area did not take any action to prevent crime.

Interpretation of findings

Certain communities have a higher level of associated firearm ownership and access to firearms than others do. The highest level of firearm ownership was evident in Lekoa-Vaal formal areas and the settlement of Tsolo-Qumbo. As in the previous chapter, ease of access is seen as a contributing factor to the increased firearm penetration. In the two focus groups, it was evident that accessibility was closely linked to an internal source of firearms within the case-study settlements.

The main reason why respondents would consider owning a gun was linked to issues of self-defence or protection. Looking at existing actions against crime, it was found that in the Lekoa-Vaal urban area (13.7%) and Tsolo-Qumbo (9.3%) a proportion of the respondents at a household level had already obtained a firearm as a crime-prevention measure.

One of the aims of this chapter has been to try to determine which of those in the sample own a firearm. Starting from the premise that respondents do not always admit to owning firearms in a survey, it was intended that this information be gathered in another manner. The extent to which this was achieved is a moot point. If respondents have a friend or family member who has a firearm, they are more likely to have a firearm themselves. This statement does not, however, hold across gender or age lines, but it probably would hold across settlement area. Similarly, if a respondent has access to a firearm, this probably would imply that the firearm is held by by the respondent himself/herself, or by friends or family living within a similar settlement area.

If respondents are willing to own a firearm, and they have friends or family who do own firearms, and they have a high ease of access to a firearm, this could also indicate that the respondents are existing or potential future firearm owners.

These categories of existing and potential firearm owners would both be high-priority categories of people to target in a public awareness or education campaignon on firearm safety practices and responsible firearm possession.

Finally, up to this point in the monograph the focus has been on where firearms are located and who are likely to have a firearm in their possession. The following section considers the attitudes of these respondents to firearms. The reason for this is the belief that the decision to own a firearm is not always based on the 'choice', 'love' or 'want' to own a firearm, but sometimes out of a lack of choice.

It is hypothesised that the firearm proliferation may be occurring from a fear of crime belief that firearms are the only form of protection available in response to rising crime.