“A house isn’t a home without a gun” is a common sentiment in the Republic of Montenegro. This survey from the South Eastern Europe Clearinghouse for the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SEESAC) examines the small arms situation in Montenegro. It presents findings on the distribution, impact and perceptions of small arms, and on government capacity for conducting SALW intervention. It finds that there is an abundance of small arms in Montenegro and that Montenegrins believe there are too many guns in society. However, traditions of gun ownership, perceptions that guns offer security from crime and mistrust of the police make Montenegrins reluctant to surrender their weapons.
There are 168,000 – 246,000 small arms in Montenegro, of which approximately 126,000 – 175,000 are in civilian hands. Despite difficulties distinguishing between government and civilian-held weapons, there is a strong consensus that the domestic illicit small arms market is saturated. Prices for small arms remain stable and low, despite insecurity, suggesting that demand is low because most people already own a gun.
Findings on the impact and perceptions of small arms in Montenegro include:
- violent crime levels are relatively high in Montenegro compared with the rest of the region and have remained stable since 1999. Firearms are the primary tools used in violent crime, with handguns the primary weapons used in assaults;
- most gun assaults occur between groups of young men in bar and street fights. Most victims and perpetrators of gun assaults are men, with the young population most at risk;
- although Montenegrins believe there are too many guns in society, gun ownership is perceived as legitimate for defensive purposes and for celebrating special occasions;
- there is significant concern regarding certain practices involving small arms. Carrying a weapon in public, using an automatic weapon and shooting while intoxicated are all viewed as unacceptable;
- Montenegrins mistrust the police and have a negative attitude towards the Ministry of Internal Affairs; and
- a firearms law approved by the government in June 2004 bans carrying legally owned weapons without a separate licence.
Montenegrins considered the ‘Farewell to Arms’ weapons collection campaign a limited success, given the relatively low number of weapons collected. They suggested that future initiatives provide individual rather than community-based incentives to turn in weapons, and be accompanied by harsher penalties for illicit gun ownership. Further conclusions and suggestions – coming from a variety of sources, such as local focus groups – include:
- weapons collection programmes could include anonymous return of weapons, prolonged amnesty, the establishment of a political consensus and the participation of community leaders;
- lack of reliable information poses an obstacle to improved regulation of weapons. Increased international and regional attention could improve transparency on government stockpiles and previous distributions, illuminating the SALW situation;
- Montenegrins’ confidence in national and international security providers varies. Proposed weapons collection initiatives should therefore be designed to reassure citizens of their objectives and provide for their security and confidentiality; and
- weapons collection initiatives cannot take place in a vacuum. Enhanced control measures, such as prohibition of the public carrying of weapons, are necessary to reduce the high numbers of small arms in Montenegro.
