BANGKOK: The government of Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul faces a major challenge not only in steering Thailand through its economic difficulties, but also in tightening public-safety measures and modernising state agencies to maintain social order.
Its latest initiative is another amendment to the Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, Fireworks and Imitation Firearms Act, B.E. 2490 (1947), which has already been revised nine times during its 79 years in force.
The renewed push follows a series of violent crimes involving firearms and mounting public questions over the effectiveness of gun controls administered primarily by the Interior Ministry.
Deputy Prime Minister for Legal Affairs Pakorn Nilprapunt said a key element of the overhaul would be the creation of a real-time firearm tracking system covering every stage, from importation and sale to ownership, licensing and transfer.
The system would include firearms held by individuals, commercial operators and shooting ranges, with the aim of closing gaps throughout the regulatory process.
Thirteen areas identified for reform
The Interior Ministry, through the Department of Provincial Administration, previously met representatives of several agencies and agreed that the firearms law should be amended.
The principles behind the proposed changes were subsequently published on the government’s central legal consultation platform for public comment between August 12 and September 10, 2026.
However, the system has not yet formally opened for submissions because parts of the proposal still require revision.
The published principles identify 13 areas for improvement affecting members of the public, state officials, firearms businesses and shooting-sport competitors.
They include tighter rules governing licences to manufacture, purchase, possess, use, order, import, assemble, repair, alter, trade in or distribute firearms and ammunition.
The amendments would also establish clearer liability for licence holders who fail to comply with the law. Examples include failing to bring a firearm into the licensing system or negligently allowing another person to possess or use a weapon registered in the licence holder’s name.
Amnesty proposed for illegal firearms
One proposed measure is intended to encourage people to bring illegal firearms and ammunition into the official system.
Under a time-limited amnesty, those who surrender illegally held weapons to the authorities would not face criminal liability.
The proposal would also allow a person who possesses a legally registered firearm but does not hold the required possession licence to apply for one under relaxed conditions.
However, the measure would not be available to criminals or suspects who are under investigation, facing trial or involved in a case that has not yet reached a final judgement.
The amnesty would remain in force only for a specified period. Anyone found in violation after the deadline could face penalties twice as severe as the rates ordinarily prescribed by law.
Firearm licences could be limited to three years
The proposed amendments would also limit firearm licences to a maximum validity of three years, requiring holders to renew them promptly after they expire.
Licence fees could be increased, while applicants would face more rigorous checks of their qualifications and any characteristics that might disqualify them from firearm ownership.
Applicants could be required to submit a medical certificate confirming their physical fitness, issued only by a state healthcare facility.
Where a local registrar has grounds for concern, the applicant could also be instructed to undergo a mental-health examination.
Firearm owners may additionally be required to demonstrate their ability to handle a weapon safely. This could involve providing evidence of firearms training and passing a test on relevant gun laws.
The intended result is to reduce the risk that people legally licensed to possess firearms will use them to commit offences.
Owners could be liable when others use their guns
Another important provision would impose responsibility on licence holders who negligently allow another person to possess or use their firearm.
The measure is intended to encourage owners to store their guns more carefully and prevent weapons from being taken and used in serious crimes.
Public questions have also been raised over whether privileged groups and politicians are able to possess more firearms and ammunition than ordinary citizens.
One proposal under discussion is to specify a clear statutory limit on the number of firearms that an individual may own.
Wider official discretion raises concern
The Department of Provincial Administration’s proposed consultation will inevitably involve discussion of greater authority and discretion for officials.
However, official discretion has itself repeatedly been identified as a possible source of problems.
The proposals have not yet set out safeguards that would fully reassure the public that stronger controls would improve safety both now and in the future.
The initial drafting process is expected to take at least three months before the bill can be submitted to Parliament, potentially towards the end of the parliamentary session.
Even after the draft enters the legislative process, it remains unclear whether MPs will reach broad agreement.
Some of the government’s ideas have already attracted opposition. These include a complete prohibition on carrying firearms and Anutin’s remarks suggesting that shooting an intruder who enters a home would be unlawful.
Opponents argue that such an approach could undermine the rights of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves and their property, without demonstrating that it would effectively address the present problem.
New restrictions could create opportunities for bribery
Some proposed rules could also impose a disproportionate burden on the public.
There are concerns that stricter regulation, while intended to improve firearm control, could create opportunities for corrupt officials to demand bribes or collect illicit payments connected with unregistered weapons.
Laws that give officials extensive discretion have long prompted questions over whether that authority will be exercised fairly.
Those concerns become more serious when there are no consistent or traceable standards allowing decisions to be audited retrospectively.
The challenge for the government is therefore not simply to strengthen the law, but to create a transparent enforcement system that does not allow tighter controls to become another source of corruption or extortion.
Firearms Act amended nine times since 1947
Disagreement has accompanied several of the nine previous changes to Thailand’s firearms law, even when amendments were intended to reflect the conditions of their time.
The first amendment, introduced in 1948, tightened controls over the export, import, alteration and movement of firearms between jurisdictions during the post-war period.
The second amendment in 1958 expanded the legal definition of a firearm to include individual components, seeking to prevent people from smuggling separate parts into the country and assembling weapons themselves.
The third revision, introduced in 1967, tightened licensing requirements to prevent firearms from falling into the hands of people considered dangerous.
In 1976, the fourth amendment increased penalties for possessing illegal firearms and strengthened rules concerning searches and arrests.
The fifth amendment, introduced in 1979, prohibited people from carrying firearms in towns, villages or on public roads without a carry permit, except where there was a necessary reason.
A sixth change later in 1979 strengthened inspections of firearm stockpiles, shops and weapons factories.
The seventh amendment in 1987 expanded controls over imitation firearms, including toy guns resembling real weapons, as well as fireworks and explosives used for industrial purposes.
The eighth change did not directly amend the Act, but came through Order No. 44 of the National Administrative Reform Council, which increased maximum prison terms and fines for offences involving firearms and explosives.
The ninth and most recent amendment was made in 2000, when fees for P.3 purchase permits and P.4 possession-and-use licences were revised.
The planned 2026 amendment would therefore be the tenth major change to the law.
The central question is whether a comprehensive overhaul can genuinely reduce violence involving illegal firearm possession and use, while addressing regulatory gaps without imposing unreasonable burdens on lawful owners or creating new opportunities for official corruption. - The Nation/ANN
