Gun Ownership in Belgium

2015

In this paper we try to track the effects of the stricter gun law introduced in Belgium in 2006. To structure the analysis, we start from the objectives defined at the time when the Belgian weapons law was discussed and introduced. A first objective of the law was to ensure that Belgian gun legislation complied with the UN Firearms Protocol and the European Firearms Directive (which was to be revised in 2008). The old weapons law, dating from 1933 and amended in 1991, was not sufficiently in accordance with international regulations.5 Over time, moreover, Belgian firearms legislation had become fragmented, complex, and maladjusted to current risks and crime trends. Another objective of the law was therefore to bring more coherence and uniformity in the Belgian control regime and in the issuing of firearms licences.6 In section 3 of this paper we enquire whether the law of 2006 has made the Belgian gun control regime more compliant with international standards, and whether it has made this regime more coherent and effective in addressing current trends in gun-­‐related crime. A second objective of the 2006 weapons law was to restrict the accessibility of firearms for citizens and to reduce the level of private gun ownership.7 In section 4 we will use various methods to find out whether rates of gun possession have indeed decreased in Belgium as a result of the law of 2006. We then review these objectives against the background of some of the fundamental questions guiding firearms policies and gun control research. An oft-­‐cited element in discussions about strengthening gun regulations is their possible economic impact. Both arms production and the legal arms trade represent a significant economic value, not only in terms of turn-­‐over but also of employment. During the discussions in 2006, representatives of the Belgian arms sector voiced their concern that the introduction of the stricter law would have a negative impact on the economic viability of the sector: not only because the new law would further restrict access to guns, but also because it introduced stricter rules for arms dealers.8 Since the introduction of the stricter law, representatives of the sector have regularly argued that the law of 2006 has negatively impacted on the legal arms trade. In section 5 we look at various data sets to review the effects the 2006 weapons law might have had on the civilian market for firearms in Belgium.

The rate of gun ownership can only be estimated as nobody knows the number of illegally held firearms. Whilst illegal owners do not care about firearms regulations legal owners receive the entire impact of gun regulations. It is therefore of utmost importance to pay attention to the legal status of firearms misused in violent crimes and their real numbers. I looked deeper into official data regarding gun ownership and the numbers of legal and illegal firearms in Europe and compared them with the report by the Flemish Peace Institute.

In recent years Belgium has often been labelled one of Europe's hotspots for illicit firearms, including military-grade assault rifles. Among other things, this label is a result of the evidence indicating that the terrorist networks responsible for the Paris attacks in 2015 acquired some of their firearms in Belgium. Belgium also has a historical reputation as being a 'gun country' due to, among other things, hundreds of years of firearms production and related traditions, its lenient firearms legislation until 2006, and numerous export and trafficking scandals involving firearms. Yet, despite this reputation, very little academic or policy-oriented research has been undertaken on the size and dynamics of the illicit firearms market in Belgium in general and on terrorist access to this market in particular. In this chapter we will analyse the characteristics and dynamics of the illicit firearms market in Belgium, with a special focus on terrorist access to this market and the Belgian policy that has been developed in recent years to combat this security phenomenon.

Project INSIGHT Research Paper, 2023

Converted firearms are the most prominent type of privately made firearms (PMFs) currently circulating in the European Union (EU). The European Commission has adopted measures to address regulatory loopholes in recent years, but their impact will take time to be felt given delays in implementation in some member states, and the substantial numbers of readily convertible weapons already in circulation. 3D-printed firearms, ghost guns, and counterfeit firearms represent emerging but concrete threats, as illustrated by recent seizures of these types of weapons. The regulatory challenges posed by 3D-printed firearms are particularly significant. The lack of standardization and granularity in official seizure data currently hinders a comprehensive analysis and monitoring of the use of PMFs in crime and violence. As PMFs may constitute a growing proportion of seized and crime firearms in the future, providing law enforcement officers and journalists with the necessary knowledge and skills to detect and report on PMFs will be critical to tackling this threat.

Research in brief, 1997

2015

What are the levels of firearms availability in Europe? Are there links between the levels of gun ownership in European countries and these countries’ rates of violence and violent death? And what is the impact of European gun laws on public safety and health? The absence of evidence specifically for the European context makes it difficult for policy-makers and researchers to find impartial and unbiased answers to these questions. Hence the pressing need for research that specifically focuses on gunrelated violence in the European context: and with the present report, we would like to make a contribution to that effort. As we are moving into largely uncharted territory, our analysis of the European situation will necessarily be exploratory. Our primary ambition is to collect and take stock of the fragmented evidence that is available on gun-related violence in Europe. Our geographical coverage will be broader than the EU and encompasses a group of approximately 40 European countries, although in some instances we will limit our analyses to the EU28. In the report’s first chapter, we briefly dwell on one of the most crucial variables in research on gun control and violence: the level of gun ownership in society. Although the prevalence or availability of firearms is a key variable, collecting adequate data on levels of gun ownership can be troublesome. In chapter 1 we therefore devote some space to a critical assessment of the available statistics for Europe. Next, in chapter 2, we look at gun-related violence in Europe. Given the absence of good data on gunrelated violence in general, including information not only on mortality but also on injuries and other forms of firearms-related victimization, we will focus exclusively on violent deaths – which seems a legitimate methodological choice for exploratory purposes. We urge the reader, however, to keep in mind that gun-related violence is a much more complex phenomenon than this focus might suggest. As is normal in research dealing with gun control not only from a public safety but also a public health perspective, we shall look both at gun-related homicides and at suicides. Taking the analysis further, we then ask in chapters 3 and 4 whether rates of gun possession and violent death in Europe are correlated: do high levels of gun possession in European countries correlate with high levels of homicide and suicide? The results of probing that question lead us to suggest that research into gun possession and violent death should also factor in the effects of firearms legislation. Specific European research into this question is scarce, which makes it difficult at the moment to arrive at conclusions for the whole of Europe. In chapter 5 we therefore focus on the results of three recent studies on the effects of stricter gun legislation on violent death rates in Austria, Belgium and Switzerland.

European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 2011

Review of European Studies

Personal violence, has declined substantially in Europe from 1200-2010. The conventional wisdom is that the state’s monopoly on violence is the cause of this happy result. I find some evidence that does not support this hypothesis. I suggest an alternative hypothesis that could explain at least some of the reduction in violence, namely that the invention and proliferation of compact, concealable, ready-to-use firearms caused potential assailants to recalculate the probability of a successful assault and seek alternatives to violence. I use structural change models to test this hypothesis and find breakpoints consistent with the invention of certain firearms.