2004 Volume 3

Know your weapon!

We had an interesting occurrence that illustrates the trouble a firearm owner can get into should he be unaware of certain circumstances relating to his firearm, or if dealing with incompetent police officials.

It was a call from a SAPS detective seeking information about a firearm we had sold a year or two ago. The owner of the firearm, Mr Kiva, was arrested at a roadblock in Umtata on the 7th August. The roadblock was for searching persons and vehicles.

When the SAPS Captain and Inspector at the roadblock couldn't match the serial number on the firearm to the licence they threw him into the cells. I would have thought that it makes no sense for a licensed firearm owner to carry a different gun from the licensed one, and that any policeman would have enough savvy to look further than the obvious. But no, they threw him into the cells. Despite his having told them where the WR No was, they refused to field strip the gun to confirm it, or to let him do so.

He was released on bail on the 10th August on a magistrate's instructions, but his gun was kept for ballistic tests.

The arrested man was in legal possession. It is his firearm, licensed to him. So why are the serial numbers on the gun and the licence not the same?

The number on the arm is the original manufacturer's number. The number on the licence is a WR number. For those who might not know, occasionally two firearms surface with the same number. Or to be more precise, a firearm is purchased that has the same number as another firearm already on the CFR's records. The reason is simple enough. Firearms made by different manufacturers at different places, at different times, can have the same number because the manufacturers are using a similar numbering system.

The procedure in such cases is that the second firearm gets a WR number assigned to it by the Central Firearms Register. That is, all such numbers are prefixed by "WR". The dealer or gunsmith stamps that number on the firearm. The old number is not removed, at least we don't remove them, because removing them would deface the firearm and it would need reblueing.

Perhaps, more importantly, the old number is the paper trail to the WR number, and given the state of the CFR's records, we think it is better that the old number is not removed. It should not cause any confusion, as anyone who knows about WR numbers would recognise that the WR number is the right one that should correspond with the licence.

So far so good. The problem in this particular case was that the WR number was stamped inside the frame. In a case like this it is simple common sense to field strip the piece to look for the number, or at the very least, check with the dealer who sold the firearm. In the event, that's what the detective did, but not before the owner had been in the cells for a few days. That information is also on the CFR's records.

The pistol is a Luger i.e. Browning HP clone. Just to check, I field stripped one. It would have taken them ten seconds to strip and expose the serial number. Their refusal to do so, or to let the owner do so, is suspicious in the extreme. For that matter they could have phoned us for confirmation of the number and the owner's lawful ownership of the piece, as he asked them to do. In the event the call we got was from him.

They still haven't looked for the number; otherwise the magistrate wouldn't have ordered that the gun be retained for ballistic tests, nor that the owner be released on bail, rather than just released – period. And that's the other point - his ordeal is not over, as he may yet be charged with illegal possession and will be faced with the cost of that, not to mention the inconvenience of a trial in Umtata.
Call me paranoid if you like, but their refusal to carry out any of the simple measures (five minutes work at most) to confirm the owner's story, suggests a more sinister motive. Let's not forget that the Firearms Control Act (FCA) is based to a large extent on the British model, the general thrust of which is the harassment of firearm owners to render firearm ownership not worth the trouble. In this particular case I believe an opportunity for harassment was seized upon with the objective of demonstrating to this owner that firearm ownership isn't a good idea, and by extension, sending that message to everyone who learns of it.

That implies that it will be done at every opportunity to spread the message as widely as possible. The implications are not lost on this particular victim, who is aware what was done to him is so stupid on the face of it that there must be more to it than simple stupidity. He said that the casual ease with which they threw him into the cells, and their lack of interest in checking his story, suggests that it may be a regular occurrence. He would like to charge them with wrongful arrest and imprisonment, but said that he can't afford the cost, which is precisely how they get away with it. Of course such malfides can't be proved, but at the very least we are entitled to expect that when arrested, our story will be listened to and properly investigated.

As far as I can see, therefore, the lessons of this story are these: Really nasty behaviour can be expected from the SAPS, given a convenient excuse. If you have a gun with a WR number, or one that needs to be so stamped, make sure it's clearly visible. Make sure you also understand the reason for the WR number. Understand your rights in respect of such things as roadblocks and powers of arrest. Personally I would tell an arresting officer that I would definitely sue if he refused to accord me the hearing to which I am entitled as a citizen. If, like this man, you find yourself in court, be ready to assert your rights and ensure that the magistrate understands what's what. And finally, keep important phone numbers handy. Your spouse should also know whom to contact if he or she is the only call you get to make.

I can't imagine why anyone would stamp a WR inside the gun where it can't be seen, unless it's for cosmetic reasons. It's not easy to get a set of numbers lined up straight and I suppose a poor stamping job could look bad on an expensive firearm. As long as the owner knows where the number is and can strip the firearm to show it, there shouldn't be a problem.

In the light of this particular incident, however, we shall be stamping WR numbers where they can be clearly seen unless otherwise instructed by the owner who is then responsible for any possible consequences such as those described.