Changes

[[Japan]] has what many consider to be the world's strictest [[gun control]] laws, and the idea is often put forward that the Japanese gun control laws should serve as model for other nations. However, although gun related crimes in Japan are lower per-capita than elsewhere, such reasoning ignores many other factors, which at the end of the day makes for an unpersuasive argument. Many people simply recite the statistics that show that Japan has less guns and less gun crime. However, the claim that fewer guns correlate to less violence is plainly wrong. Japan, even with its severe gun controls, still suffers from a murder rate similar to that of Switzerland, one of the most gun-intensive societies on earth.

[[Japan]] has what many consider to be the world's strictest [[gun control]] laws, and the idea is often put forward that the Japanese gun control laws should serve as model for other nations. However, although gun related crimes in Japan are lower per-capita than elsewhere, such reasoning ignores many other factors, which at the end of the day makes for an unpersuasive argument. Many people simply recite the statistics that show that Japan has less guns and less gun crime. However, the claim that fewer guns correlate to less violence is plainly wrong. Japan, even with its severe gun controls, still suffers from a murder rate similar to that of Switzerland, one of the most gun-intensive societies on earth.

One United States Government advisory commission, in a 1973 report, while conceding that cultural factors may have something to do with Japan's lesser crime, argued that gun crime in Japan declined every year since 1964, when the controls were enacted in their current form. <ref>National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals, in A National Strategy to Reduce Crime; January 1973; p 141</ref>. But the selection of 1964 was highly artificial. Near absolute gun prohibition had existed for over three centuries, and the current system of controls was put in place during the American occupation, and formally codified in 1958. There was no reason to pick 1964 as the year that gun control went into effect.

One United States Government advisory commission, in a 1973 report, while conceding that cultural factors may have something to do with Japan's lesser crime, argued that gun crime in Japan declined every year since 1964, when the controls were enacted in their current form.<ref>National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals, in A National Strategy to Reduce Crime; January 1973; p 141</ref> But the selection of 1964 was highly artificial. Near absolute gun prohibition had existed for over three centuries, and the current system of controls was put in place during the American occupation, and formally codified in 1958. There was no reason to pick 1964 as the year that gun control went into effect.

Many people cite the Japanese example, without understanding exactly what the law is, how it is implemented and enforced, as well as the culture within the country itself towards both gun ownership and authority. Although crime figures, especially gun-related crimes, are lower in Japan than many other places, it comes at a cost to the civilian population. This cost can be broadly summarised as a combination between increased police monitoring and reduced civil liberties.

Many people cite the Japanese example, without understanding exactly what the law is, how it is implemented and enforced, as well as the culture within the country itself towards both gun ownership and authority. Although crime figures, especially gun-related crimes, are lower in Japan than many other places, it comes at a cost to the civilian population. This cost can be broadly summarised as a combination between increased police monitoring and reduced civil liberties.

In January 2008, then-Prime Minister Yasuo Fu<i></i>kuda of Japan's ruling conservative [[Liberal Democratic Party of Japan|LDP]], in response to an increase in violent crimes committed by minors and organised crime (''bouryokudan'' 暴力団), called for an amendment to the constitution, to allow for even tighter firearms control measures.<ref>"LDP's platform to call for a new Constitution"; http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20070524a3.html.</ref>

In January 2008, then-Prime Minister Yasuo Fu''''kuda of Japan's ruling conservative [[Liberal Democratic Party of Japan|LDP]], in response to an increase in violent crimes committed by minors and organised crime (''bouryokudan'' 暴力団), called for an amendment to the constitution, to allow for even tighter firearms control measures.<ref>"LDP's platform to call for a new Constitution"; http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20070524a3.html.</ref>

Extensive police authority is one reason the Japanese gun control system works. Another reason is that Japan has no cultural history of gun ownership by citizens.

Extensive police authority is one reason the Japanese gun control system works. Another reason is that Japan has no cultural history of gun ownership by citizens.

===Licensing===

===Licensing===

The licensing procedure is thorough and strenuous. Any prospective gun owner has to first attend classes and pass a written exam. This is followed by classes held on a shooting range and a shooting test. 95% of applicants usually pass. <ref>The test covers the maintenance and inspection of the gun, loading and unloading cartridges, shooting from various positions, and target practice for stationary and moving objects. "Gun Control Laws in Foreign Countries; 1981; Library of Congress; Washington; Page 130</ref>

The licensing procedure is thorough and strenuous. Any prospective gun owner has to first attend classes and pass a written exam. This is followed by classes held on a shooting range and a shooting test. 95% of applicants usually pass.<ref>The test covers the maintenance and inspection of the gun, loading and unloading cartridges, shooting from various positions, and target practice for stationary and moving objects. "Gun Control Laws in Foreign Countries; 1981; Library of Congress; Washington; Page 130</ref>

Even if they pass the safety exam, applicants then undertake a simple "mental aptitude test" at a local hospital, which ensures that the applicant is not suffering from any readily detectable mental illness. The applicant then provides the police with a medical certificate attesting that they are is mentally sound and not addicted to drugs. The total cost of the procedure is some ￥15000 ($150), with an additional ￥17000 ($170) for a 3-month hunting license.<ref>Article 29 of the Act</ref>

Even if they pass the safety exam, applicants then undertake a simple "mental aptitude test" at a local hospital, which ensures that the applicant is not suffering from any readily detectable mental illness. The applicant then provides the police with a medical certificate attesting that they are is mentally sound and not addicted to drugs. The total cost of the procedure is some ￥15000 ($150), with an additional ￥17000 ($170) for a 3-month hunting license.<ref>Article 29 of the Act</ref>

The police then investigate the applicant's background, including his relatives, to ensure that both have no criminal records. In addition, known membership of "aggressive" political or activist groups automatically disqualifies an applicant. The police have the discretion to deny licenses to any person for whom "there is reasonable cause to suspect may be dangerous to other persons' lives or properties or to the public peace." <ref>Articles 5-1 and 6-3 of the Act</ref>

The police then investigate the applicant's background, including his relatives, to ensure that both have no criminal records. In addition, known membership of "aggressive" political or activist groups automatically disqualifies an applicant. The police have the discretion to deny licenses to any person for whom "there is reasonable cause to suspect may be dangerous to other persons' lives or properties or to the public peace." <ref>Articles 5-1 and 6-3 of the Act</ref>

The test and all-day lecture are only held once a month. The lecture almost always requires that the licensee take a full day off from work--not a highly regarded activity by Japanese employers. An annual gun inspection is scheduled at the convenience of the police, and also requires time off from work. Licenses must be renewed every three years, with another all-day safety lecture and examination at police headquarters.

The test and all-day lecture are only held once a month. The lecture almost always requires that the licensee take a full day off from work—not a highly regarded activity by Japanese employers. An annual gun inspection is scheduled at the convenience of the police, and also requires time off from work. Licenses must be renewed every three years, with another all-day safety lecture and examination at police headquarters.

Successful applicants are required to store their weapons in a locker, with any ammunition being kept in a separate locked safe. They are required to provide the police with a map of their apartment, which clearly indicates the location of the locker.  The license also allows the holder to purchase a few thousand rounds of ammunition, with each transaction being registered.

Successful applicants are required to store their weapons in a locker, with any ammunition being kept in a separate locked safe. They are required to provide the police with a map of their apartment, which clearly indicates the location of the locker.  The license also allows the holder to purchase a few thousand rounds of ammunition, with each transaction being registered.

===Comparison of Gun Crime Statistics Worldwide===

===Comparison of Gun Crime Statistics Worldwide===

*Source:  [http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publicat/cdic/cdic191/cd191d_e.html W. Cukier, Firearms Regulation: Canada in the International Context, Chronic Diseases in Canada, April, 1998] (These statistics updated to reflect most recent figures, as at January 2001) <ref>http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html</ref>. Only the top and bottom five countries, with available information, are shown, out of a total of 25 countries on the list.

*Source:  [http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publicat/cdic/cdic191/cd191d_e.html W. Cukier, Firearms Regulation: Canada in the International Context, Chronic Diseases in Canada, April, 1998] (These statistics updated to reflect most recent figures, as at January 2001).<ref>http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html</ref> Only the top and bottom five countries, with available information, are shown, out of a total of 25 countries on the list.

{| border="1" cellspacing="2px" cellpadding="2px" width="100%"

{| border="1" cellspacing="2px" cellpadding="2px" width="100%"

In addition, the Japanese people fully accept the authority of their police and trust their government. In this cultural context, it is easy to see why gun control has succeeded in Japan - the people accept gun control with the same readiness that they accept other Government controls. Further, they have little incentive to disobey gun controls, since they have hardly any cultural heritage of gun ownership.

In addition, the Japanese people fully accept the authority of their police and trust their government. In this cultural context, it is easy to see why gun control has succeeded in Japan - the people accept gun control with the same readiness that they accept other Government controls. Further, they have little incentive to disobey gun controls, since they have hardly any cultural heritage of gun ownership.

The Japanese Government itself promotes a social climate for gun control by essentially disarming itself. The police, although they carry guns when on duty, rarely use them. This too, has a cultural background, as when the National Police Agency was created in the late 19^th century, as part of the [[Meiji Restoration]], many of the founder-members were former [[samurai]], who were now unemployed as a result of the abolition of feudalism. Their code believed that guns were for cowards, and that real men fought using the martial arts.  

The Japanese Government itself promotes a social climate for gun control by essentially disarming itself. The police, although they carry guns when on duty, rarely use them. This too, has a cultural background, as when the National Police Agency was created in the late 19th century, as part of the [[Meiji Restoration]], many of the founder-members were former [[samurai]], who were now unemployed as a result of the abolition of feudalism. Their code believed that guns were for cowards, and that real men fought using the martial arts.  

Ironically, the Japanese police only started to carry firearms when ordered to do so in 1946 by [[Douglas MacArthur|General MacArthur]]. Two years later, when the American occupation forces noticed that few police officers had obeyed the order to arm, the Americans supplied the police with guns and ammunition.<ref>D Bayley; Forces of Order: Police Behavior in Japan and the United States; University of California Press; 1976; pp 164 & 180</ref>

Ironically, the Japanese police only started to carry firearms when ordered to do so in 1946 by [[Douglas MacArthur|General MacArthur]]. Two years later, when the American occupation forces noticed that few police officers had obeyed the order to arm, the Americans supplied the police with guns and ammunition.<ref>D Bayley; Forces of Order: Police Behavior in Japan and the United States; University of California Press; 1976; pp 164 & 180</ref>

Even if the initial 28 day detention period has expired, detention in a Japanese police station often continues, based on numerous pretexts, such as preventing the defendant from destroying evidence. Another common tactic is to re-arrest the suspect on another charge, called ''bekken taihou'' (別件大法; literally, "separate case, basic law"), which means a fresh 28-day detention period under interrogation. This "rearrest" often occurs whilst the suspect is still being held on the first charge. Some defendants may be held for several months without ever being brought before a judge. The courts approve around 99.5% of prosecutors' requests for extended detentions.<ref>The Joint Committee of the Three Tokyo Bar Associations for the Study of the Daiyö-Kangoku (Substitute Prison) System, Torture and Unlawful or Unjust Treatment of detainees in Daiyö-Kangoku (Substitute Prisons) in Japan (1989)</ref><ref>K Nakayama; "Japan", published in G Cole, S Frankowski, and M Gertz (eds); Major Criminal Justice Systems: A Comparative Survey; Sage Press; 1987; page 181</ref>  

Even if the initial 28 day detention period has expired, detention in a Japanese police station often continues, based on numerous pretexts, such as preventing the defendant from destroying evidence. Another common tactic is to re-arrest the suspect on another charge, called ''bekken taihou'' (別件大法; literally, "separate case, basic law"), which means a fresh 28-day detention period under interrogation. This "rearrest" often occurs whilst the suspect is still being held on the first charge. Some defendants may be held for several months without ever being brought before a judge. The courts approve around 99.5% of prosecutors' requests for extended detentions.<ref>The Joint Committee of the Three Tokyo Bar Associations for the Study of the Daiyö-Kangoku (Substitute Prison) System, Torture and Unlawful or Unjust Treatment of detainees in Daiyö-Kangoku (Substitute Prisons) in Japan (1989)</ref><ref>K Nakayama; "Japan", published in G Cole, S Frankowski, and M Gertz (eds); Major Criminal Justice Systems: A Comparative Survey; Sage Press; 1987; page 181</ref>  

During a suspect's detention, he may only receive visits from his criminal defense lawyer, and these meetings are strictly limited to 15 minutes at a time and between 1 to 5 visits, depending on the length of the detention. These visits can even be denied if they hamper the police investigation. During the same time, police can interrogate the suspect for up to 12 hours a day and complaints of abuse and torture are rife. <ref>Baba v Japan (Sapporo High Court, 1950) (defense counsel had 20 minutes of access on the third day, and 30 minutes each on the ninth and tenth days of detention; this amount of access was deemed reasonable by the court)</ref><ref>'Japan, Behind the Myth of Japanese Justice', American Lawyer, July/August 1985</ref> [[Amnesty International]] have called the Japanese police custody system a "flagrant violation of [[United Nations]] human rights principles".<ref>"News and Notes"; 1990' 7 CJ International</ref>

During a suspect's detention, he may only receive visits from his criminal defense lawyer, and these meetings are strictly limited to 15 minutes at a time and between 1 to 5 visits, depending on the length of the detention. These visits can even be denied if they hamper the police investigation. During the same time, police can interrogate the suspect for up to 12 hours a day and complaints of abuse and torture are rife.<ref>Baba v Japan (Sapporo High Court, 1950) (defense counsel had 20 minutes of access on the third day, and 30 minutes each on the ninth and tenth days of detention; this amount of access was deemed reasonable by the court)</ref><ref>'Japan, Behind the Myth of Japanese Justice', American Lawyer, July/August 1985</ref> [[Amnesty International]] have called the Japanese police custody system a "flagrant violation of [[United Nations]] human rights principles".<ref>"News and Notes"; 1990' 7 CJ International</ref>

The Japanese legal system can best be described as "an omnipotent and unitary state authority." As all the law enforcement administrators in Japan are appointed and funded by the National Police Agency, the police are effectively protected from complaints from politicians or citizens.<ref>J Williams; "Japan: The price of safe streets"; Washington Post; 13 October 1991</ref> The only check on the State's power is its own conscience.

The Japanese legal system can best be described as "an omnipotent and unitary state authority." As all the law enforcement administrators in Japan are appointed and funded by the National Police Agency, the police are effectively protected from complaints from politicians or citizens.<ref>J Williams; "Japan: The price of safe streets"; Washington Post; 13 October 1991</ref> The only check on the State's power is its own conscience.

==References==

==References==

{{Reflist|2}}

{{Reflist|2}}

[[category:Japan]][[category:Gun control]]

[[Category:Japan]][[Category:Gun control]]