Examination of witness (Questions 360
-373)
TUESDAY 11 JANUARY 2000
MR DAVID
PENN
360. In section 5.5 it says, "Prior to
this, certain dealers were marketing under the `shotgun' category
weapons such as revolvers and self-loading carbines smooth-bored
and fitted with crude barrel extensions, some of which were later
used in serious crime after being cut back to their original barrel
lengths". The fact of the matter is, of course, that would
have been entirely illegal under the Firearms Act 1968?
(Mr Penn) You have me there. It was dealt with by
the 1988 Act.
Chairman: Would you like to drop us a line about
those points. Thank you.
Mr Singh
361. I understand you are an expert on antique
and historic firearms?
(Mr Penn) Yes, they are my personal interest.
362. And that the law in that area is very,
very complex. How well do you believe the present controls allow
public and private collectors of firearms of antique or historic
interest to maintain or expand their collections?
(Mr Penn) The law on antiques is actually very short
and very simple, it is section 58(2) of the Firearms Act; it is
the interpretation that has caused some difficulties in the past,
which is the reason why there is very substantial Home Office
guidance on that. Essentially the line that has been taken very
clearly in recent years is that it is appropriate to control firearms
in relation to their perceived danger of misuse. There has been
virtually zero track record of misuse of genuine antique muzzle-loaders;
zero track record of misuse of certain types of early breech-loading
firearms. As a result, in broad terms, the guidance given is that
these need not be licensed unless the owner wishes to shoot them.
If they are just a collector's piece, a curiosity or ornament,
then they may be possessed without a licence. For more modern
arms where there is a legitimate collector interest, arms that
fall under section 1, the collecting of which is now recognised
as a good reason and the collector negotiates with his local police.
As far as shotguns are concerned, there are no controls on numbers
or types of shotgun provided they fall within the legal definition
you can hold under section 2. The collector there is effectively
not inhibited in his collecting. That said, other countries have
looked at the problem and have issued special collectors' licences.
One of the FCC proposals in the past on which no action has been
taken is that collectors' licensing is an area worth a look, because
it is true to say that the law for section 1 firearms is cumbersome
for collectors.
363. Is there any evidence to suggest that antique
or deactivated weapons are used as replica or imitation firearms?
(Mr Penn) Deactivated modern arms, yes, they can be
used in the same way as a replica. Not of any significant incidence
is the use of older types, because they are not very convincing.
If you walk into a building society with a Flintlock pistol it
is more likely to raise an eyebrow than a hand.
364. I understand your Committee does not support
the idea of a general ban on the common circulation of realistic
replicas, even though there are elements of the police in favour
of that. What are the difficulties in banning the circulation
of replica firearms? How effective are bans on replicas in other
countries like the Netherlands?
(Mr Penn) The major problem is that you cannot claw
back those replicas that are already out there. You could have
an amnesty and some people would hand them in. You could stop
further trade in them, but there are already certainly many hundreds
of thousands, and possibly more, realistic replicas out there.
You also have some air weapons which are realistic replicas. You
would have to consider banning those as well. On the spectrum
of arms that are misused, one has to accept that in a fraught
and tense situation almost anything can be construed to be a firearm.
There was one case where a courgette was used and another more
recent case, reported a few days ago in the press, where a banana
was used. Toy guns have been successfully used. Very sadly at
the India House siege two of the three youths involved who were
armed with children's cap pistols were shot and killed because
the arms were not recognised for what they were. You would have
to hit a definitional point as to what is realistic, and that
might be almost impossible to find a satisfactory answer to. They
have tried this in the Netherlands. The law in the Netherlands
is that any realistic firearm (and it has to be realistic in appearance
and colour) is banned in a way that they do not actually ban real
firearms. For a number of areas of use where a replica might be
perhaps better from the public safety point of view, theatricals
and that sort of thing, they now have to use the real thing. There
is some question in the Netherlands as to whether they should
now remove colour as a criterion. Because with the use of plastics
in firearms you can have any colour you like. There is some evidence
of criminals in the United States painting firearms so that they
look like replicas because it slows the police down.[1]
The system in Holland works on the principle of a committee, which
is made up of police, judiciary, government officials, but there
is no representative of the user of replicas or the importer of
replicas, and they have tended to ban very widely as a result.
All that happens is that if people want such replicas they buy
them in France, England or somewhere else and bring them in through
open borders. There is now a move in Holland to review what is
being done and to set up a set of criteria. At the moment there
are no criteria for what is a realistic replica or what is not,
it is just a decision made in committee, so no-one has a yardstick.
I would not say that the Netherlands system is one that has worked
very well and, as far as I know, they are already reviewing its
effectiveness and what they can do about it.
365. They have not gone as far as banning courgettes
or bananas yet!
(Mr Penn) No. If you wished you could perhaps legislate
against the shortening of cucumbers except for making sandwiches.
366. Your Committee has made detailed recommendations
about the standards of deactivation of weapons. You say in your
recommendations that the Home Office should draw up a revised
strength and specification for the deactivation of handguns along
with moving parts. How serious a threat to public safety is posed
by current deficiencies in the present standards of deactivation
of weapons? How urgent is it that your recommendations are acted
upon?
(Mr Penn) The standards for deactivation of submachine
guns and self-loading rifles have been greatly strengthened. The
present day standards of deactivation for these, for all practical
purposes as far as we know, are not yet being beaten, and probably
will not be because they are so radical. There had been some discussion
about what to do about handguns before Dunblane, when of course
they were not prohibited weapons at that stage; but proposals
in that area were put on the back burner after Dunblane and have
not yet been resurrected. The argument is that the deactivation
standard for pistols and revolvers is not sufficiently rigorous,
and that is something which should be looked at. For submachine
guns I think it now is.
367. In terms of your recommendations you prioritise
in terms of the ones you want firm action on. Is this one of the
areas you want firm action on?
(Mr Penn) Yes, this is obviously an area of high priority
because we have had evidence from the police and from the forensic
science bodies that there is still reactivation of pistols, so
that is a problem. I have to say, if we block that particular
avenue we will then be looking at something else in a year's time.
Mr Howarth
368. Mr Penn, just to go back to what Mrs Dean
was discussing with you over the illegal use of weapons, you say
in your evidence to us that the whole Committee has taken the
view that the vast majority of serious firearms crimes are committed
using firearms that are not licensed and are owned illegally,
often by people who would never be granted a certificate if they
applied for one. You have suggested to the Government that there
ought to be an inquiry into the origin of weapons recovered by
the police, which seems to me to be pretty elementary. We have
the Home Office Minister coming to occupy that chair in a few
minutes, what would you like us to say to him about your request
for funds and authority to go ahead to do such research?
(Mr Penn) I hope you will press him. The nation has
just spent around 90 million to remove legally owned handguns.
What is being proposed by the FCC is a picture of one year's seizures
which would cost, to carry out, a few hundred thousand or a bit
over a million and would require the police to actually set aside
every firearm they recover in any circumstances. I am not talking
just about firearms actively used in crime, but every firearm
recovered: deceased's effects, Customs' seizures, you name it.
Then we would at least get a yardstick for one year. I have to
say that the numbers of firearms involved are daunting. The Forensic
Science Service, I think it was last year, saw about 580 firearms
from the Metropolitan area alone, and those were only firearms
that it was felt necessary for the Forensic Science Service to
see. Other firearms that had not been licensed but were, for instance,
deceased's effects were not brought to their notice. The numbers
of firearms out there that crop up are still very, very high.
369. You are not proposing that the police carry
out this research. Having recovered the weapon they would hand
them over to the Forensic Science Service and others who would
be nominated to carry out the research?
(Mr Penn) The argument is that for consistency in
interpretation you really need one team to look at the lot. The
proposal is that it would perhaps be done by the team viewing
the arms on a regional basis. As you know, the police forces operate
to some extent on a regional basis. The arms would be brought
in to a regional centre, looked at, and decisions (which often
would be at best informed guesses) would be made about the likely
origin of the arms and then, after the work had been done, the
arms would go for destruction.
Chairman
370. Mr Penn, we had some evidence earlier of
what we would call "rent-a-gun" outfits, if you want
a shooter you know which pub to go to; tell them what you want
and you are likely to get it. Are you aware of that going on?
(Mr Penn) Yes. There is a lot of anecdote in this
area. One example of murder would be Mr Bata, the Hungarian pensioner
who was convicted of murder towards the end of last year, he was
found to have several illegal firearms and he maintained that
the one he actually used he had bought in a pub for £450.
The experience in other countries is similar. For instance, in
Mexico 20 or 30 years ago, where firearms legislation was fairly
stringent but firearms very widespread in society, the usual place
to acquire one was the barber shop. That is where you went if
you wanted to buy one.
371. Can you help me with Customs and Excise?
You mentioned earlier the illegal importation of weapons, often
along with drugs and, possibly, with illegal immigrants as well.
Are you able to talk to Customs and Excise about what they are
trying to do in these areas?
(Mr Penn) Customs and Excise is represented on the
FCC in that we have a senior customs officer
372. Do they make any comment to you about either
the adequacy or the inadequacy of the kind of equipment they have
in place at ports of entry to better detect these weapons?
(Mr Penn) No. As far as I recall, and I have attended
every meeting, they have not commented on equipment.
373. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Penn. Thank
you for your help, it has been most helpful to us. You are perfectly
welcome, of course, to stay, if you want, and hear the Minister.
(Mr Penn) I will, thank you.
1 Note by witness: In some American states,
manufacturers of imitation firearms are required to paint these
bright orange to make clear that they are not real. Some criminals
have therefore taken to painting real guns orange so that police
or victims might believe them to be fake and hesitate to react
until it is too late. Back
|