Jamaica Farewell The consequences of gun prohibition.

By Dave Kopel, Paul Gallant & Joanne Eisen of the Independence Institute.
Kopel’s book The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt
the Gun Controls of Other Democracies? includes a chapter on Jamaica.

“Down the way where the nights are gay, and the sun shines daily on the
mountain top, I took a trip on a sailing ship, and when I reached Jamaica I
made a stop.”

Back in the fifties when Harry Belafonte sang “Jamaica Farewell” (written by
Lord Burgess), he lamented, “My heart is down, my head is spinning around. I
had to leave a little girl in Kingston town.” Then, a tourist in Kingston
heard “Sounds of laughter everywhere.” Today, the tourists are long gone
from Kingston, and the defining sound of Jamaica’s capital is gunfire.

The latest round of trouble started on July 7 when a pre-dawn police raid
went sour. On July 11, England’s Guardian painted a grim picture of paradise
lost: “Tanks and troops in armoured cars patrolled the streets of parts of
Kingston last night as the Jamaican government struggled to restore
order…” By the time the shooting was over, police and soldiers had “fired
10,000 rounds, recovered no guns and found no criminals, but slaughtered
men, women, children, dogs, a cat and a goat in Tivoli Gardens….”

Jamaica’s major newspaper, the Gleaner, painted another picture, of
financial ruin staring Jamaica in the face: “The disturbance…received
widespread international attention…and already some hoteliers are
reporting a high level of cancellation.” Ed Bartlett, opposition
spokesperson on tourism, commented that “crime and violence are threatening
to destroy the sector. More than anything else, they have served to tarnish
the country’s image overseas and as the Tourism Minister rightly stated,
what we are now promoting is damaged goods.”

But unwelcome publicity isn’t new to Jamaica, because of rampant crime,
out-of-control police, and the consequences of gun prohibition.

Probably in no other country is the devastation caused by restrictive
firearm laws more evident than it is in Jamaica. Much of the criminality
present today can be traced directly back to the Gun Court Act of 1974,
intended to “take guns off the streets, out of the hands of criminals, and
to lock up and keep gunmen away from decent society.”

Instead, it has accomplished exactly the opposite. The Gun Court took guns
only out of the hands of Jamaica’s law-abiding, leaving them at the mercy of
the criminals and the state. The abject failure of the Gun Court Act to
achieve its stated purpose was pointed out in the Gleaner on February 1:
“Twenty-seven years after the Gun Court was established as a division of the
criminal justice system illegal guns remain a plague on society.”

Today in Jamaica, easily acquired black-market guns have now largely
replaced lawfully acquired guns. For a price, a wide variety of choice of
guns are available.

While it’s a simple matter to get hold of a gun through illegal channels,
legal acquisition is an entirely different matter. In a guest appearance at
a recent local chamber of commerce meeting, Police Commissioner Francis
Forbes addressed “the problem faced by both security firms and law-abiding
citizens in obtaining firearms, users permit and licenses.” Reported the
Gleaner, “The Commissioner replied that there are procedures which must be
rigorously followed in granting firearm licenses…He appealed to persons
experiencing delays to be patient as the Force has to be satisfied that such
persons are worthy permit holders.”

“Worthy permit holders”? Few Jamaicans appear to have sufficient funds or
the desire to purchase enough “worthiness” to qualify. It’s much easier to
purchase a gun on the black market, or build one from scratch, than to
satisfy a bureaucrat who’s determined to find you “unworthy.” Even before
the 1974 law, the Jamaican gun licensing system was run so that only about
1% of the population was “worthy” enough to own a gun.

By perverting the definition of what constitutes “criminal” behavior, the
Jamaican government has created a society predominated by criminals.

Much of the violence stems from the often violent rivalry between Jamaica’s
two major political parties – the People’s National Party (PNP), and the
opposition Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) – dating back to the 1970s. As the
Associated Press noted, “Politicians disavow ties to Jamaica’s ruthless
gangs, but their histories are intertwined. The fearsome gang culture
developed…when politicians armed criminals to intimidate voters as the two
main parties fought for supremacy. The gangs, made financially independent
by the drug trade, now have evolved into a virtually uncontrollable force.”

Jamaica’s murder rate has long been among the world’s highest, lagging only
behind South Africa and Brazil according to current U.N. estimates. While
rising crime rates were used to justify the Gun Court Act and a variety of
other repressive laws, crime today is skyrocketing out of sight. The problem
has been the focus of ten comprehensive studies and recommendations since
1976, the latest one released this year.

Jamaica’s police are a big part of the problem. Jamaica’s rate of lethal
police shootings is among the highest in the world. At 5.38 per 100,000
population (vs. about 0.11 for the U.S.), that’s higher than the overall
homicide rate in many American states, and in most European nations.

Joining the Jamaica Constabulary Force is tantamount to obtaining a license
to kill. Of every two police officers who spend 25 years on active duty in
Jamaica, one of them is destined to kill in the line of duty, suffering no
legal or employment repercussions.

Contrast that with the aftermath of a questionable fatal shooting here in
the US: an officer might lose his gun and badge, be sent to jail, be sued by
the federal government for the deprivation of the victim’s civil rights, or
face trial for a wrongful death. Not uncommonly, it marks the end of a
career.

The problem was exemplified when, in a prelude to July’s public relations
debacle, more than 40 police and soldiers swooped down on a house in Braeton
during the pre-dawn hours of March 14, and shot dead 7 men, all purported
gang members. The police account is that they identified themselves as
officers and asked the occupants to come out, but were greeted by gunfire.
Relatives and residents disputed that, calling the raid a “cold-blooded
killing”, pointing out that not one of the lawmen was bruised or injured.
The high percentage of fatal headshots to the victims described in the
post-mortem report strongly suggested that the police action amounted to
seven assassinations. Former Prime Minister Edward Seaga called Braeton an
act of state terrorism.

Jamaica’s violent side has taken a heavy toll. The economic lifeline of
Jamaica is tourism, with the island attracting nearly one million visitors
each year. In the 1970s and 1980s, tourists flocked to places like Negril,
Ocho Rios, and Montego Bay, ignoring the turf wars going on several hours
away in Kingston.

But no longer. The latest outburst of violence came with a price tag
estimated at $14 billion in lost tourism revenue. Frederick March, area
chairman for the Jamaica Hotel and Tourist Association, warned that the
industry, already in dire straits, can not afford to take another beating.
As March pointed out, Jamaica’s image overseas is problematic and travelers
fear for their safety.

Mark Kerr-Jarrett, President of the Montego Bay Chamber of Commerce, agreed:
“Crime and tourism do not go hand in hand and I am afraid that if the crime
rate continues to climb like this then we are really in for some very rough
times.”

The problem is exacerbated by tourist harassment. The April 1, 2001 Gleaner
noted that “Jamaica will lose an estimated $1 billion annually because of
two cruise lines’ decisions to redeploy several of their vessels from Ocho
Rios to other destinations.” The experience of American Matt Sauer in trying
to retrieve his camera from a tour guide at one of Jamaica’s waterfall
attractions exemplified the problem. Before venturing up the falls, guides
encourage tourists to leave their cameras behind, and one goes around
collecting them. Sauer likened the experience to “a hostage trying to
negotiate [his] own release.” Said Sauer, “We were told on the ship to
expect this sort of thing, but until you get here one will not fully
understand the magnitude of what is happening here.”

Said another American tourist, Gary Ghems, “This is a wonderful attraction,
easily the best of its kind in the Caribbean. However, what is happening
here is a major turn-off for a lot of visitors…This is simply an elaborate
scam, that maybe the authorities need to take a look at.”

Has Jamaica’s downward spiral reached the point of no return? Can anything
turn Jamaica around, or is it just a nation with nowhere else to go but
further down?

When you’re going to hell in a handbasket, reversing course is usually a
good idea, and the Jamaican government has recognized this with regard to
its drug policy: in August, it began to consider re-legalizing marijuana,
which is currently used by about 20% of Jamaica’s population (including
Rastafarians, for whom it is a sacrament).

Many more policy reversals are needed. The government has already
acknowledged that drug prohibition is a failure, that the 1974 anti-drug
laws (enacted at the behest of the Nixon administration) have devastated
civil liberties, enriched gangs, and made Jamaica more violent. The main
obstacle to the repeal of Jamaica’s destructive laws appears to be
opposition from the U.S. government.

Sociologist Peter Espeut put forth a good recommendation: “The police force
as presently constituted seems unable (or unwilling) to cleanse itself, and
the governments of both parties seem to lack the political will or the
testosterone to step in and make the necessary changes.” Pointing out that
“the large number of questionable police killings suggests that there are a
large number of police killers,” Espeut advised abolishing the Jamaica
Constabulary Force, and establishing a Police Service.

With regard to firearms, Jamaica’s government remains wedded to its
failures. At the recent United Nations conference on small arms, Jamaica’s
representative proposed exporting his country’s toxic policy, as he urged
nations which manufacture arms to reduce their output to a level sufficient
only to supply government agents.

But because Jamaica’s antigun laws haven’t protected the Jamaican people,
and because the police won’t protect the Jamaican people, the Jamaican
government lacks any plausible moral authority to deprive its citizens of
the means of self-defense. Kingston has degenerated to the Hobbesian
nightmare of a war of all against all, aggravated by the government
supplying arms to one group of gangs (the police) and enriching other gangs
(through drug prohibition laws that provide the gangs with their lucrative
trade).

Currently, the Jamaican parliament is dithering over a new “Offensive
Weapons Act” that would impose still more controls on “anything that can be
manipulated by the hand of man.” The country would be a lot safer if,
instead, parliament enacted a Vermont-style concealed gun carry law -
allowing anyone without a criminal record to carry a firearm for lawful
protection. No police permit needed. The crime rate would plunge as
defenseless victims become armed prey, willing and able to fight back
without fear of government retribution for exercising the fundamental human
right of self-defense.

Reduce crime, and the tourist industry will begin to recover, even in
Kingston. Repealing all the harmful antigun laws, besides saving the lives
of many Jamaicans, could also spawn a whole new tourist industry.

Far fetched? Gun-related tourism is already enriching Guam, which does a
roaring business from Japanese tourists seeking a go at rented guns. The
now-closed Diamond Head Gun Club in Waikiki, Hawaii, used to draw Japanese
who were willing to pay for the sheer fun of shooting a gun. In 1997,
manager Daniel Perez-Nava told reporters that the majority of its customers
came from tourist groups visiting the island from other countries. “These
people have flown halfway across the Pacific for a chance to shoot 52 rounds
of 22 caliber ammunition. For some of them, it will be the only time in
their lives they will have an opportunity to shoot a real gun because of the
gun controls in their country….”

If tourists will fly to Guam just to shoot, they would certainly fly to
Jamaica for the same pleasure – Jamaica being larger and more beautiful than
Guam. In 2000, approximately 135,000 Britons visited Jamaica. Why not offer
tourists from countries like Great Britain what they can’t get back home?

Even American tourists would come to Jamaica for shooting action hard to
come by in the States, like firing a fully automatic gun (legal in most
states, but not in some, such as New York), or shooting an exotic movie gun
from Robocop.

Cambodia is pursuing just such a tourist strategy. At the Pkorlan Club
Shooting Range near Phnom Penh, tourists pay to shoot automatic rifles -
even including the M60 machine gun – and to throw hand grenades. The cost is
a $1 per bullet, which adds up very, very fast when one is shooting a
machine gun. But as a reporter from the Toronto Globe and Mail, who had no
previous shooting experience, explained, “you cannot help but be thrilled by
such a visceral experience.” (Christopher Vedelago, “‘Do not point at
anything you are not willing to shoot’: The transformation from happy
tourist to grenade-lobbing military warrior is easy in Cambodia. Just go to
the Pkorlan Club Shooting Range,” The Globe and Mail, Aug. 18, 2001, p. T3).

Or.Jamaica could continue to pass more laws that don’t work, insist that
citizens trust the police to take care of protecting them, and hope that 27
years of failed repression will somehow lead to success in the 28th, 29th,
or the 30th year, when the necessary quantity of civil-liberties destruction
is finally achieved.

Should Jamaica choose the latter course, the gun prohibition and drug
prohibition bureaucracies at the United Nations stand ready and eager to
help. But when this tack fails, Jamaica will find itself without a
legitimate government, for, as Hobbes explained: “The Obligation of Subjects
to the Sovereign is understood to last as long, and no longer, than the
power lasts, by which he is able to protect them. For the right men have by
Nature to protect themselves, when none else can protect them, can by no
Covenant be relinquished.” (Leviathan, ch. 21).