Firearm experts say Bitou Municipality deputy mayor still broke the law even if it was a toy gun

Firearm experts have said that the Bitou Municipality deputy mayor, Nokuzola Kolwapi, will have a lot to account for after she discharged what she said was a toy gun in a viral video, as her behaviour was reckless and contravenes the Firearms Control Act.

Kolwapi, who is also the Ikhwezi Political Movement (IPM) President, released an official statement through the party’s social media on Monday, saying that the video was taken during the celebration marking the return of her son from ulwaluko - a sacred Xhosa initiation ceremony that marks the transition into manhood.

In her statement, she specifically mentions it being a “replica (toy-gun)”, however, firearm experts have come out and said that they don not view it as such, and that even if it were, she still broke the law.

Martin Hood, a dedicated attorney at MJ Hood & Associates, specialises in matters of firearm law and is also a firearm instructor.

He explained that Kolwapi's cultural argument holds no merit as “there is no culture that recognises waving a firearm around in public”, so her “relying on culture is absolute rubbish”.

“The Firearms Control Act classifies a replica of a firearm. In other words, in this instance, a toy gun (is perceived) as the same as a firearm depending on how it is used. For example, if you point a toy gun at somebody and they believe that it is in fact a real firearm, that's a criminal offence,” Hood said.

“There are possible criminal offences that could stem from an adult, and I want to stress an adult, because obviously a child with a toy gun is potentially quite different, but an adult waving around an object that looks like a firearm is completely unacceptable, and in public, even less acceptable.

“It was reckless, and it potentially constituted one or more possible criminal offences.”

Hood explained that the offences relate to the pointing of a firearm, as the law does not require a firearm to be specifically pointed at someone to be an offence.

“It can be an offence if it's just brandished in public with the intention of people believing it to be a firearm, and then (another offence) if she discharged that firearm, which could be discharging a firearm in a public place… There is absolutely no excuse to brandish anything that looks like a firearm in a public celebration in a public place. It's reckless, it's stupid, and it must be condemned,” Hood said.

Hood explained that if someone were to legally get a firearm, they would have to write a test on the law, which is a legal requirement.

Forensic Science Consultant and CEO of Wesco Forensic Services, Jannie van der Westhuizen, said that if you apply for a firearms license, “obviously, you're going to go and look at the firearm first, and (if) you're paying a deposit on that specific firearm that you want to acquire then you have to go through a competency test”.

“They do a background check on you (to see) if you (are) mentally fit to own and operate a firearm.

“There are certain things that you need to go through, and then once you've been found mentally fit, and competency fit, and that you can handle this firearm in all aspects, and you've gone through all the firearms laws and by-laws, (including) when to aim and when not to aim, when to draw, where not to draw, when to shoot and when not to shoot. You have absolutely no excuse for doing what she did.”

“If she had pulled the trigger by accident, pointing the firearm at someone unbeknownst to her, surrounding her in that event, and would have killed an individual or badly injured, what would her excuse be?”

Van der Westhuizen said, based on the video evidence circulating social media, that he does not believe it was a replica as it looks legit.

“She's discharging a semi-automatic pistol by the looks of it, it looks like Taurus semi-automatic pistol, and it's ejecting fired cartridge cases by pulling the trigger, and she's discharging the firearm, which I don't think is a toy, because toy firearms don't eject cartridges. And the way that she's handling the firearm means she obviously didn't get the necessary training.”

Hood added that when looking at the Julius Malema case, “he was prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, possibly because of political reasons, but the fact remains that he's a public figure”.

“The deputy mayor is a public figure. I want her to go through the same process that Julius Malema did. I don't want this to be swept under the carpet, and I don't want political influences to come into play, and for it just be suddenly ignored.

“It is irresponsible, and it was behaviour where people could’ve believed it was a real firearm, and therefore, there are criminal offences that must be investigated, and she must be charged.”

Hood explained that he agreed with Van der Westhuizen that it was a real firearm, but that “it is always difficult to make that conclusion without actually seeing the object and being there”.

theolin.tembo@inl.co.za