DELROY CHUCK'S proposal for legislation to allow greater access to stun guns and pepper sprays has prompted much discussion. The Opposition Spokesman on Justice, speaking in the sectoral debate in Parliament on Tuesday, made the proposal against the background of a call he made a few weeks ago for the general citizenry to be more aggressive in fighting back against criminals.
The proposal has already been rejected by the Ministry of Justice, contending that the devices are too dangerous. In fact the police have already reported incidents of gunmen using pepper spray to disable their victims. But while we appreciate the concerns of potential abuse of the devices, we do not believe the proposal should be dismissed altogether.
The Government allows the issuing of firearms to licensed firearm holders. Gun licences are usually issued to persons believed to be responsible and who it is expected will use them primarily for self-defence. A few instances of abuse notwithstanding, this general principle has guided the behaviour of the vast majority of private gun licensees. The same could be applicable to stun guns and pepper spray.
Pepper spray was first used by the United States Postal Service as a dog repellent in the 1980s. Since the 1990s, police departments in North America have been authorised to use pepper spray to force suspect compliance as an alternative to using other weapons such as batons, which cause more injuries. Civilians in the United States are allowed to use pepper spray as a weapon for self-protection, but commercial pepper spray sold is one-fifth as concentrated as that used by law enforcement.
Pepper spray can affect the eyes, cause temporary paralysis of the larynx, among other effects that disable an attacker, giving the victim time to escape. On the other hand some overseas cardiologists worry that stun guns, which police use to subdue suspects with a jolt of electricity, can interrupt the heart's rhythm and can possibly cause death. They are concerned, too, that at just the right moment in the heartbeat cycle, stun guns can trigger a potentially deadly state known as ventricular fibrillation during which the heart writhes uncontrollably.
As with any other weapon we believe the Government can craft legislation governing their use and punish those who violate it. For there is a greater danger. Among the factors fuelling anger against the state and its security agencies is the sense that the people of the country are left dependent on an unreliable police force. When they resort to 'doing their own thing' the results are much, much worse.
Let us have an informed debate about the potential abuses, dangers and possibilities for control.
THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER.
