New Gun Law in Brazil

Also in the Times, Larry Rohter has a report on a new law in Brazil to limit possession of guns:

No country in the world has a higher rate of homicide by firearms than Brazil, and the toll is highest in large cities like this one. But now, in what gun control advocates describe as a bold but risky social experiment, Brazil has virtually outlawed the possession of handguns.

Since just before Christmas, no one in this nation of 175 million except police officers, soldiers and prison and security guards has been authorized to carry a pistol.

The sale and trade of weapons has been similarly limited: the illegal purchase, possession or furnishing of arms has become a criminal offense with no bail and long prison sentences. Gun owners are being told that most of them will have to hand over their weapons within six months.

"This is an expression of the unanimous will of society to cut the spiral of violence that unsettles us and embarrasses us before humanity," President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said when he signed the bill. Noting that a homicide occurs in Brazil every 12 minutes, he added that "this statute is certainly not the solution to everything, but it is an exceptional step forward."

I'm really torn by this. There are a lot of legitimate arguments for and against the law brought up in Rohter's article, but at the core of the law's proponents is a population extremely weary of the violence. I do think that this is worrisome:

But the law also contains an unusual feature that worries gun advocates in a country where people talk routinely about ambitious laws that are passed but "don't catch on" because of a lack of enforcement. A national referendum has been scheduled for October 2005, in which voters will be asked whether they want the gun sale restrictions to continue or be revoked.

"This is an act of cowardice by the governing class, which ought to at least be willing to take the political risks involved," said Oscar Vilhena, board chairman of the Latin American Institute for Crime Prevention here.

"They can't offer security to the people," he said, "so by asking a terrorized populace to vote in favor of this, they have assured that if things don't work out, they are not the losers."

as is this:

"The majority of those who kill are not criminals, but ordinary people with guns who get into arguments about banal things, like traffic disputes or arguments in a bar," said José Vicente da Silva, a former secretary of public security for the state of São Paulo. "Obviously this law is not going to deter the professional criminal, but it can be a valuable tool to substantially reduce the murder rate."

and this:

Many of the guns used to commit crimes are, in fact, police or military weapons that have been stolen by or, more often, sold to criminal groups. There is also a booming traffic in weapons seized by police officers, so the law calls for the destruction within 48 hours of all guns confiscated by the police that are not needed as evidence.

I once toured the emergency room at the hospital in Belo Horizonte where my sister-in-law's husband, Lúcio was on call as a maxillofacial surgeon. There were three gunshot wounds to the face brought in while I was there. Amazingly they all were conscious with bullets lodged in their jaws. I would imagine most doctors are probably tired of seeing these cases.

Comments

[Tom DC/VA]

I don't see why you feel this law is worrisome (or is it the opponents that worry you?). A referendum isn't a bad way to get a population to invest in a new policy. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but handgun control strikes me as a big cultural change for Brazil.

More generically, if Brazil is to take the next step in the development of its democracy, the people need to rid themselves of the notion that the government's failures are anything but their own failures. I think Brazilians have elected a pretty good president this time, but its sounds like recent choices farther down the line still haven't been so wise.

[Randy Paul]

I feel that this particular point is worrisome:

"They can't offer security to the people," he said, "so by asking a terrorized populace to vote in favor of this, they have assured that if things don't work out, they are not the losers."

I worry that the poorest of the poor will not be protected from the violence that has become so endemic in the favelas and the poorer areas of the country. It doesn't mean that the police will set up shop in the favelas to protect these people and that as Oscar Vilhena said the rich won't pay the same price as the poor if this law fails.

The other things I found worrisome were simply the facts as detailed: the randomness of the violence (arguing in traffic or bars, for example) and the fact that so many weapons were police or military weapons.

Thanks for commenting.

[CScott]

I worry for the rights of the many poor who never seem to get as much protection by the Police as the middle class or rich. Also those in rural areas who use hunting as part of their survival. I like the idea that the referendum gives The People the ultimate choice, pity we don't get such rights here in The USA to override our Politicians and their bribery/lobbying money. I do worry that manufactured fear through the media can control how many people cast their votes. I guess in the end, The people of Brazil are truly responsibly for the outcome of this by how smart they vote. The only way to revert back to a Country CONTROLLED by "The People" is to make all Laws passed in the USA go through a similar system of voter ratification prior to being enacted. (a non-chaotic mob rule, the very thing Tyrants, Politicians, Federalist and Lobbyist fear cause it removes their power)Power To The People!