In an op-ed published by The Common Sense, Gideon Joubert, a prominent advocate for gun rights, argues that the changes would effectively undermine the country’s sport shooting community. The proposed amendments to the Firearms Control Act include limits on the number of firearms a sport shooter may own and a ban on private ammunition reloading, measures he says would “effectively destroy competitive and recreational shooting sports” in South Africa.

At the centre of the debate is the potential tightening of access to firearms for civilian use. Critics say the measures risk targeting compliant, law-abiding individuals rather than addressing the root causes of violent crime, such as illegal firearms and weak enforcement capacity.

Sport shooting in South Africa operates within a highly regulated framework, with participants subject to licensing requirements, competency testing, and ongoing oversight. Joubert argues that this system produces firearm owners who are not only licensed but highly skilled, noting that shooting sports provide “a competitive, peer-accountable environment” in which safety and proficiency are continuously reinforced.

The op-ed further highlights concerns that the proposed restrictions contradict the government’s own commissioned research. A study by the Wits School of Governance found that reductions in firearm-related crime are primarily linked to effective policing rather than legislative restrictions alone, and warned against relying on stricter gun laws as a substitute for enforcement.

Data cited in the piece also challenge the assumption that legal firearm owners are a major source of guns used in crime. Over a ten-year period, police reportedly recovered more firearms than were lost or stolen from civilians, while the overall pool of illicit firearms remains driven by other factors, including corruption and organised crime.

Supporters of stricter regulation maintain that tighter controls are necessary to reduce violence and improve public safety. However, opponents argue that policy should focus more directly on criminal networks and enforcement failures rather than compliant citizens.

There is little credible research to support the view that tighter regulation of lawful firearm owners improves public safety. On the contrary, a growing body of evidence suggests that overly zealous regulation can undermine both public safety and civil rights, by disarming compliant citizens while leaving criminal networks largely unaffected.