QUESTION OF LAW RELATED TO THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL FIREARMS : THE STUDY TENDS TO CONDUCT SPECIFICALLY ON THE CASE BEING TAKEN FOR USE IN THE COMMISSION OF CRIMINAL OFFENCE

Abstract

This research aims to : study and compare the principle of law of Thailand and the law on firearms of others country. With regard to the offence under the act on firearms, ammunitions, explosives, fireworks and  artificial firearms, B.E. 2490 (1947), it did not stipulate an offence on the use of the artificial firearms, just for the reason that such law has already provided the provisions prohibiting persons from ordering, importing or trading the artificial firearms without a license only. The law did not prohibit the persons from publicly possessing or carrying them. If a possessor of an artificial firearm should have used it to intimidate others, he would be liable under the criminal code for causing fear or fright to others only despite the fact, in reality, that the consequences were bad and also deemed to be the social endangerment. Anyhow, the laws were different in the sense; therefore, when an artificial firearm was used to intimidate others or used in the commission of the other crimes, the offender should be liable for punishment, as well. Hence, this point was the important issue of this research work. BY using the rules of the qualitative research for documentary research by conducting the study from the principle of law of Thailand and the law on firearms of Japan, Malaysia, Republic of Singapore, People’s Republic of China and the Federation of Switzerland in order to collect data for further synthesis. It was found, as a result of the research that the Act on firearms, ammunitions, explosives, fireworks and artificial firearms, B.E. 2490 (1947) did not expressly provide any specific provisions relating to the offence of carrying

the artificial firearms which when comparing to the Laws on Firearms of Japan, Malaysia, Republic of Singapore, People’s Republic of China and the Federation of Switzerland. I further found that the relevant law of Thailand still lacked legal provisions for punishing those who commit crimes related to the use of artificial firearms to intimidate others or used for other crimes.

           Suggestion : the act on firearms, ammunitions, explosives, fireworks and artificial firearms, B.E. 2490 (1947), should be revised to be in line with the principles of social protections according to the guidelines of Japan, Malaysia, People’s Republic of China and the Federation of Switzerland in order to give rise to the social justice because in the absence of the law, the perpetrators cannot be punished, as hinted by the Law Proverb that “There must be no punishment accept in accordance with the law.”