How gun control policies evolve: Gun culture, ‘gunscapes’ and political contingency in post-Soviet Georgia

Abstract

We analyse the influence of gun culture and exogenous political events on gun regulation in post-Soviet Georgia. While neighbouring states retain restrictive Soviet-era gun laws, in Georgia, state failure, armed conflict and proliferation of weapons during the 1990s all impelled recent governments towards moderate gun policies, including liberal rules on handgun ownership, strict rules on gun carriage and a national gun registry. We conceptualize gun policy as the product of relatively durable institutional legacies and underlying social attitudes—in this case, a distinctive post-communist ‘gunscape’—which constrain future policy development; and specific political conjunctures, which provide opportunities for limited policy experimentation. While Georgian gun owners desire weapons for self-defence, sport and the affirmation of masculinity, they do not seek to defy the state or replace its role in collective security, leading to a moderate ‘harm reduction’ approach to regulation that may be applicable in other post-conflict societies.

An explorative analysis of the perception of guns and gun laws in Azerbaijan using a mixed-methods approach

“…Azerbaijan's neighbouring state, Georgia, also experienced armed conflict and proliferation of weapons during the 1990s, which impelled successive governments towards moderate gun policies, including liberal rules on handgun ownership, strict rules on gun carriage and a national gun registry. Light and Slonimerov (2019) argue that in spite of Georgian gun owners' desire for weapons for self-defence, sport and the affirmation of masculinity, there is no public intention to take over the state's role of the provision of security. This finding was identified by the current study as well.…”

Private security and national security: The case of Estonia

“…A few investigations concern the industry's development in transitional democracies and authoritarian states in the ‘Global South’ and the post-Soviet region, revealing the political questions that private security presents to such regimes. For example, private security may threaten the regime's existence ( Light and Slonimerov, 2020 ; Singh and Light, 2019 ), or as in post-Apartheid South Africa, it may constitute a legacy of an illiberal government ( Singh, 2008 ). These studies reveal private security as political actors, whether or not they are independent of the state.…”

“…Likewise, Estonia's liberal private gun ownership rules also marshal civilians for national defence. These policies contrast with both the Soviet Union and most other post-Soviet states, which remain highly restrictive, with few exceptions, such as Georgia ( Light and Slonimerov, 2020 ). According to Põierpaas, chair of the national gun licensing committee, laws on gun ownership were enacted in 1991 and 2001.…”

Regimes of representation in Canadian police museums: Othering, police subjectivities, and gunscapes

“…The scope of meaning normalizes the use of some guns, but also stabilizes or anchors certain subject positions (officer versus “criminal”) in the network (p. 555). These museum displays create a representational gunscape (Light and Slonimerov, 2020; Springwood, 2007) that not only attaches certain meanings to guns in the museums, but outwardly as well, legitimizing police violence.…”