HKSAR v. TANG YANQING

DCCC1394/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1394 OF 2010

----------------------

--------------------------

Reasons for Sentence

--------------------------

1.  You have been convicted on your own plea of possession of arms without a licence. The weapon in question was a stunning device, which is commonly known as a stun gun. It is disguised as a mobile telephone.

2.  You had come to Hong Kong from the Mainland on 20 October last year on a two-way permit, which gave you permission to remain here for seven days.  I have been told that you arrived at about 5.00 pm.

3.  In the early hours of the following morning just before 1.00 am police officers noticed you outside a building in Shanghai Street.  They stopped and searched you and then noticed that you were holding what turned out to be the stunning device. 

4.  Miss Chan, your solicitor, has told me that you were not originally holding this device but had taken it out of your pocket when the police asked you for your identification documents.  The police officers told you to hand it over.  As you were doing so, the police officers realised what it was that you were holding and they took steps to restrain you.  There is no suggestion that you had attempted to use the device to resist arrest.

5.  You were arrested and you told the police that you had it with you for self-defence.

6.  The device was later examined and found to be a stunning device capable of generating a pulsating voltage of almost 39,000 volts.  It was capable of generating 147 high voltage pulses every three seconds. 

7.  There is no tariff for the offence of possession of a stunning device.  The circumstances of each case must be looked at.

8.  Your solicitor, Miss Chan, has told me that this was an offence committed out of ignorance on your part.  You come from a rural area and had decided to use a holiday from work to come to Hong Kong for the first time.  Having seen a crime series on TV about Hong Kong, you had decided to bring a stun gun with you which you thought might be necessary for self-defence.  Miss Chan has told me and the prosecution are not in a position to gainsay it, that it is lawful to carry this sort of device in the Mainland for the purpose of self-defence.  Miss Chan says you were unaware that this sort of device was illegal in Hong Kong.  At the time the police intercepted you, you had not yet found anywhere to stay the night.

9.  What has particularly impressed me in this case is that letters to the court have been sent by a number of people: your father, your mother, your village committee, seven of your fellow villagers, and also by your employer.  All of them urge leniency.  Your father has even visited Hong Kong in order to speak to your solicitor.  A letter apparently from your local police station has been submitted saying that you have never been in trouble in the Mainland.

10.  On the facts before me I am unable to be sure that this was not an offence committed by you out of ignorance of the law in Hong Kong.   

11.  The fact remains that carrying arms without a licence in Hong Kong is a serious matter.  It is one of the reasons that it is safe to walk our streets at night.  It was at the very least irresponsible to assume that it was lawful to carry this sort of weapon on our streets.   

12.  This court has a duty to send out a message to those coming from outside that this sort of offence will lead to imprisonment.

13.  I am prepared to treat the circumstances of your case as exceptional, and bearing in mind the factors I have referred to, I am adopting a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment.

14.  You are entitled to the usual discount of one-third to reflect your plea of guilty and I accordingly sentence you to 8 months’ imprisonment.